On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Eli Friedman <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Kostya Serebryany <[email protected]> > wrote: > > A slightly edited version attached. > > --kcc > > > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Kostya Serebryany <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> Please review the following documentation change. > >> - First version of AddressSanitizer docs > >> - Documentation for __has_feature(address_sanitizer) > >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5430044 > >> Thanks, > >> --kcc > > Looks fine. > Thanks! r145276 > On a side note, why exactly doesn't address-sanitizer work at -O0? > The problem is temporary, the fix is being discussed at http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-November/045663.html Another thing, is that we probably want to discourage using AddressSanitizer with -O0 as it is too slow this way (too many redundant memory accesses are instrumented). --kcc > > -Eli >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
