In http://reviews.llvm.org/D9059#158733, @samsonov wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D9059#157697, @ochang wrote: > > > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D9059#157331, @rsmith wrote: > > > > > I'm not convinced that adding one attribute per sanitizer is the right > > > design here -- it doesn't seem to scale very well. Have you considered an > > > attribute like > > > > > > __attribute__((no_sanitize("list,of,sanitizers"))) void fn() { ... } > > > > > > > > > where the list is parsed as if it were specified as > > > `-fno-sanitize=list,of,sanitizers` on the command line? > > > > > > This does seem like a much better way of doing this. Should I change this > > in this patch? > > > > What does everyone else think? > > > I agree with this suggestion. It would be cool to have a single attribute > like this, and later deprecate no_sanitize_address, no_sanitize_thread and > no_sanitize_memory. I can put together another patch in the next few days, unless someone else (more experienced) wants to take this? http://reviews.llvm.org/D9059 EMAIL PREFERENCES http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
