3 ms·
Just as the sanitizers have a runtime, the linux kernel has a re-implementation of those runtimes (the linux kernel does not link libgcc/compiler_rt) and IIRC t
by ndesaulniers 10mo ago
Just as the sanitizers have a runtime, the linux kernel has a re-implementation of those runtimes (the linux kernel does not link libgcc/compiler_rt) and IIRC the compiler will work differently (I forget which flags control that). Prior art here.
- pizlonator 10mo agoThe sanitizer runtime is not nearly as complex as the Fil-C runtime. Sanitizers don't have to deal with: - https://fil-c.org/fugc https://fil-c.org/fugc - https://fil-c.org/safepoints https://fil-c.org/safepoints Oh and it's not clear if the current revision of the capability model would work with memory mapped IO: https://fil-c.org/invisicaps https://fil-c.org/invisicaps
- ndesaulniers 10mo agoDoes fil-c have a way of disabling the capability model for regions of code? (Rust's `unsafe` blocks come to mind). Maybe if I ask enough stupid questions, you'll get pissed and get the kernel to build/work with fil-c just to prove a stranger on the internet wrong. :P
- pizlonator 10mo ago> Does fil-c have a way of disabling the capability model for regions of code? (Rust's `unsafe` blocks come to mind). Nope > Maybe if I ask enough stupid questions, you'll get pissed and get the kernel to build/work with fil-c just to prove a stranger on the internet wrong. :P I love this attitude! :-)