Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

(report-converter ASAN) Important information missing from the reports #3639

Open
jimis opened this issue Mar 29, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

(report-converter ASAN) Important information missing from the reports #3639

jimis opened this issue Mar 29, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@jimis
Copy link
Contributor

jimis commented Mar 29, 2022

An ASAN report looks like this: tools/report-converter/tests/unit/analyzers/asan_output_test_files/asan.out

=================================================================
==12457==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free on address 0x614000000044 at pc 0x0000004f4b45 bp 0x7ffd40559120 sp 0x7ffd40559118
READ of size 4 at 0x614000000044 thread T0
    #0 0x4f4b44 in main files/asan.cpp:5:10
    #1 0x7f334b52eb96 in __libc_start_main (??)
    #2 0x41aaf9 in _start (??)

0x614000000044 is located 4 bytes inside of 400-byte region [0x614000000040,0x6140000001d0)
freed by thread T0 here:
    #0 0x4f2962 in operator delete[](void*) asan_new_delete.cc:170:3
    #1 0x4f4af6 in main files/asan.cpp:4:3
    #2 0x7f334b52eb96 in __libc_start_main (??)

previously allocated by thread T0 here:
    #0 0x4f1d32 in operator new[](unsigned long) asan_new_delete.cc:109:3
    #1 0x4f4ad4 in main files/asan.cpp:3:16
    #2 0x7f334b52eb96 in __libc_start_main (??)

SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free files/asan.cpp:5:10 in main
Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
  0x0c287fff7fb0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x0c287fff7fc0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x0c287fff7fd0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x0c287fff7fe0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x0c287fff7ff0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
=>0x0c287fff8000: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa[fd]fd fd fd fd fd fd fd
  0x0c287fff8010: fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd
  0x0c287fff8020: fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd
  0x0c287fff8030: fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fd fa fa fa fa fa fa
  0x0c287fff8040: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
  0x0c287fff8050: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
  Addressable:           00
  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 
  Heap left redzone:       fa
  Freed heap region:       fd
  Stack left redzone:      f1
  Stack mid redzone:       f2
  Stack right redzone:     f3
  Stack after return:      f5
  Stack use after scope:   f8
  Global redzone:          f9
  Global init order:       f6
  Poisoned by user:        f7
  Container overflow:      fc
  Array cookie:            ac
  Intra object redzone:    bb
  ASan internal:           fe
  Left alloca redzone:     ca
  Right alloca redzone:    cb
  Shadow gap:              cc
==12457==ABORTING

It seems report-converted only records the first stacktrace. In more complicated scenarios, the information in the other stacktraces is equally or more valuable, and the bug can't be analyzed without them. Same with the rest of the message printed, it should be presented by CodeChecker as additional information.

@jimis
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimis commented Mar 29, 2022

I added more tests and outputs from the sanitizer at #3613.

@jimis
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimis commented Mar 29, 2022

Ideally report-converter should understand that the sanitizer message starts from ==NNN==ERROR and ends at ==NNN==ABORTING, where NNN is the same number.

Currently report-converter is based on regular expressions to figure out sanitizer messages while parsing a logfile. This proves a bit restrictive.

@gaurav00009
Copy link

Hi @jimis @bruntib

Did you find any solution or patch is there? because in our we are also facing the same issue like multiple reports hashes for the same bug the only difference is their message is not similar. which was already discussed in the below open section
#3632
If any solution or upcoming patch is there please let us know so that we can go ahead with the solution.

Thanks,
Gaurav

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants