steakhal wrote: I am getting some push back internally against this change.
The problem is that some projects are close-to-the-metal (firmware, boot, hardware stuff) and there actually the only way to communicate with the hardware is via fixed addresses and a bunch of volatile pointers. Of course, this checker wasn't really designed for such code bases - if anything, for the opposite. However, projects in such a domain are also likely to have a security aware mindset, which fundamentally opposes them to just disable some checkers - especially if they are in the `core` package. I find this argument pretty solid. So the question is, why should we do about this? - Clarify the docs that this checker is not intended to be used in firmware stuff? - I want to especially avoid the users picking up the only suppression to this checker, using the `address_space(NNN)` attribute. That attribute is not documented, also has consequences on the binary so I definitely don't want to imply using that for suppression. This is kinda what users think right now, sadly. - Come up with some new way of suppressing this checker? - We could potentially move this to the `optin` package. @NagyDonat @balazske WDYT? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132404 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
