ASDenysPetrov added a comment. @chrish_ericsson_atx Thanks for the new test case. I'll handle it ASAP.
> To be clear, neither this new reproducer nor the one I originally posted fail > if commit b30521c28a4d > <https://reviews.llvm.org/rGb30521c28a4dc1b94d793385e4144ede5822b2c1> is > reverted. Is it worth considering reverting that commit until a patch that > addresses the original problem and doesn't introduce these new regressions is > available? I don't think we should revert b30521c28a4d <https://reviews.llvm.org/rGb30521c28a4dc1b94d793385e4144ede5822b2c1> because it corrects symbol representation in CSA and fixes two bugs: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37503 and https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49007. Another point of non-revert is that your cases were previously hidden in CSA core and that's good to find them. I'm afraid it's a dubious idea to return back old bugs in favor of not seeing new ones. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D104285/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D104285 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
