================
@@ -5571,11 +5571,50 @@ LValue CodeGenFunction::EmitBinaryOperatorLValue(const
BinaryOperator *E) {
break;
}
- RValue RV = EmitAnyExpr(E->getRHS());
+ llvm::Value *Previous = nullptr;
+ RValue RV;
+ QualType SrcType = E->getRHS()->getType();
+ // Check if LHS is a bitfield and sanitizer checks are enabled
+ if (E->getLHS()->refersToBitField() &&
+ SanOpts.hasOneOf(SanitizerKind::ImplicitConversion |
+ SanitizerKind::ImplicitBitfieldConversion)) {
+ // Get the RHS before scalar conversion
+ if (auto *ICE = GetOriginalRHSForBitfieldSanitizer(E)) {
+ SrcType = ICE->getSubExpr()->getType();
+ Previous = EmitScalarExpr(ICE->getSubExpr());
+ // Pass default ScalarConversionOpts to avoid emitting
+ // integer sanitizer checks as E refers to bitfield
+ llvm::Value *RHS = EmitScalarConversion(
+ Previous, SrcType, ICE->getType(), ICE->getExprLoc());
+ RV = RValue::get(RHS);
+ }
+ }
+
+ // Otherwise, visit RHS as usual
+ if (!Previous)
+ RV = EmitAnyExpr(E->getRHS());
----------------
zygoloid wrote:
Would it be correct to do the above, more-elaborate lowering instead of this
regardless of whether a sanitizer is enabled? I'd have more confidence that
we're performing a correct emission if we used the same code regardless of
sanitizer mode.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75481
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
