Gergely =?utf-8?q?Bálint?= <[email protected]>, Gergely =?utf-8?q?Bálint?= <[email protected]> Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <llvm.org/llvm/llvm-project/pull/[email protected]>
paschalis-mpeis wrote: > One piece of doubt that I have since I opened this PR: the term CFI is > overloaded, it can mean Call Frame Information and Control Flow Integrity. > This is even more problematic than usually in this case, where we talk about > the Call Frame Information related to a Control Flow Integrity mechanism, > namely Pointer Authentication. > > Another way to name these would be PointerAuthDwarf* (or capital DWARF*), to > signal that these passes take care of the DWARF CFIs in the binary. That is a good point. Generalizing to DWARF may help, but I don't have strong opinions. If the name feels too long, can consider `PAuth<..>`. It may be worth briefly describing both terms in the doc (as a hint / callout near the top) and expanding the CFI acronyms in both `*Analyzer` and `*Fixup` headers (ie [here](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/164622/files#L10)). https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/164622 _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
