> Testing SANITIZE_ADDRESS bit in flag_sanitize_recover doesn't make sense, > testing it in flag_sanitize of course does, but for recover you care > whether > the SANITIZE_{KERNEL,USER}_ADDRESS bit in flag_sanitize_recover is set > depending on if SANITIZE_{KERNEL,USER}_ADDRESS is set in > flag_sanitize_recover.
Ok, got it. BTW shouldn't we disable local optimization of ASan checks (in asan.c) as well? That would be a massive perf hit ... -Y -- View this message in context: http://gcc.1065356.n5.nabble.com/PATCH-Optimize-UBSAN-NULL-checks-add-sanopt-c-tp1085786p1095536.html Sent from the gcc - patches mailing list archive at Nabble.com.