Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nX5CF-0001Ps-CE for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 17:54:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nX5CD-0003Dz-SW for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 17:54:57 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nX5CD-0003Dq-Iw for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 17:54:57 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nX5CA-0000Ru-Nb for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 17:54:56 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 22NHsoe42771660; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:54:50 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Andres Freund cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: ubsan In-reply-to: <20220323173537.ll7klrglnp4gn2um@alap3.anarazel.de> References: <20220323173537.ll7klrglnp4gn2um@alap3.anarazel.de> Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund message dated "Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:35:37 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2771658.1648058090.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:54:50 -0400 Message-ID: <2771659.1648058090@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Andres Freund writes: > I tried to run postgres with ubsan to debug something. For 0001, could we just replace configure's dlopen check with the dlsym check? Or are you afraid of reverse-case failures? 0002: ugh, but my only real complaint is that __ubsan_default_options needs more than zero comment. Also, it's not "our" getenv is it? 0003: OK. Interesting though that we haven't seen these before. 0004: no opinion regards, tom lane