Add a second CI job on x86_64-linux for fsanitize=undefined (later asan?) builds of Lix #403

Closed
opened 2024-06-19 03:44:22 +00:00 by jade · 2 comments
Owner

We can probably afford to throw more x86_64-linux compute at our builds, and it would be nice to have actual sanitized test runs. After the rather extremely intense results of UBSan'ing and, to the extent possible, ASan'ing, lix in https://gerrit.lix.systems/q/topic:%22undefined-behaviour%22, I really think we might want to CI running the test suite with instrumentation. This would also, I guess, test no-gc builds actually work so would fix #319.

Currently ASan is very horrible due to boost coroutines being busted garbage, and I don't really want to ship it because it randomly fails for nonsense seemingly un-suppressable reasons: https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1481

We have working UBSan support in-tree as of https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1483, so there is nothing really stopping this being done as a hydraJobs entry, besides a little bit of engineering our Nix expressions to support adding the meson option nicely.

We can probably afford to throw more x86_64-linux compute at our builds, and it would be nice to have actual sanitized test runs. After the rather extremely intense results of UBSan'ing and, to the extent possible, ASan'ing, lix in https://gerrit.lix.systems/q/topic:%22undefined-behaviour%22, I really think we might want to CI running the test suite with instrumentation. This would also, I guess, test no-gc builds actually work so would fix https://git.lix.systems/lix-project/lix/issues/319. Currently ASan is very horrible due to boost coroutines being busted garbage, and I don't really want to ship it because it randomly fails for nonsense seemingly un-suppressable reasons: https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1481 We have working UBSan support in-tree as of https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1483, so there is nothing really stopping this being done as a `hydraJobs` entry, besides a little bit of engineering our Nix expressions to support adding the meson option nicely.
jade added the
stability
Area/build-packaging
labels 2024-06-19 03:44:22 +00:00
Author
Owner

Another idea for the build packaging is to make clang UBSan builds with the minimal runtime ("suitable for production use", they say) that we could deploy for developers, potentially even in the overlay. This would however cause potentially about 10% regression in perf; we would have to rerun benchmarks. Personally I wouldn't be mad about it on my own machines, but others might think otherwise. https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.html#minimal-runtime

Another idea for the build packaging is to make clang UBSan builds with the minimal runtime ("suitable for production use", they say) that we could deploy for developers, potentially even in the overlay. This would however cause potentially about 10% regression in perf; we would have to rerun benchmarks. Personally I wouldn't be mad about it on my own machines, but others might think otherwise. https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.html#minimal-runtime
Member

This issue was mentioned on Gerrit on the following CLs:

  • commit message in cl/1669 ("ci: add a asan+ubsan test run on x86_64-linux")
<!-- GERRIT_LINKBOT: {"cls": [{"backlink": "https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1669", "number": 1669, "kind": "commit message"}], "cl_meta": {"1669": {"change_title": "ci: add a asan+ubsan test run on x86_64-linux"}}} --> This issue was mentioned on Gerrit on the following CLs: * commit message in [cl/1669](https://gerrit.lix.systems/c/lix/+/1669) ("ci: add a asan+ubsan test run on x86_64-linux")
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: lix-project/lix#403
No description provided.