On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk
Just so we have something specific to talk about, here are some options:
1) For the 3.2 release, we remove the existing switches.
2) For the 3.2
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Chandler Carruth chandl...@google.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk
Just so we have something specific to talk about, here are some options:
LGTM
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.ukwrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote:
Assuming the implemented flag naming is ok with everyone, the patch is
good.
Few questions:
+ unsigned Kind;
Do we only allow
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Alexander Potapenko gli...@google.comwrote:
I haven't seen the patch yet, but here are two thoughts:
- some tools may be incompatible with each other (e.g. ASan and TSan), so
we shouldn't allow to use them together;
- there are many users of TSan and ASan, thus
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:51 AM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
The attached patch series adds a
-fsanitize=sanitizer1,sanitizer2,sanitizer3 command-line option to
Clang (and a corresponding -fno-sanitize=...). This works as follows
for the driver options:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:51 AM, Richard Smith rich...@metafoo.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
The attached patch series adds a
-fsanitize=sanitizer1,sanitizer2,sanitizer3 command-line option to
Clang (and a corresponding
Assuming the implemented flag naming is ok with everyone, the patch is
good.
Few questions:
+ unsigned Kind;
Do we only allow 32 sanitizers? Why not 64?
Do we want to change -faddress-sanitizer in asan/tsan lit tests?
projects/compiler-rt/lib/asan/lit_tests
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
+Diego,David
And if/when we add MemorySanitizer, can we add new alias
-fmemory-sanitizer?
I am asking because we are in the process of
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
+Diego,David
And if/when we add MemorySanitizer, can we add new alias
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:41 PM, Alexander Potapenko gli...@google.com wrote:
I haven't seen the patch yet, but here are two thoughts:
- some tools may be incompatible with each other (e.g. ASan and TSan), so we
shouldn't allow to use them together;
Patch 2 adds a diagnostic if the user
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Matthieu Monrocq
matthieu.monr...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to make sure everyone is on the same basis, Richard's proposal is to
have the flag be `-fsanitize` = Note the leading `f` and the absence of
trailing `r`.
Yes. Dmitry, David, could you please make the
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Dmitry Vyukov dvyu...@google.com wrote:
+Diego,David
And if/when we add MemorySanitizer, can we add new alias -fmemory-sanitizer?
I am asking because we are in the process of committing asan/tsan to gcc,
and we want to preserve consistency between clang and
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Kostya Serebryany k...@google.com wrote:
Assuming the implemented flag naming is ok with everyone, the patch is good.
Few questions:
+ unsigned Kind;
Do we only allow 32 sanitizers? Why not 64?
We currently have only 13. I don't think we'll forget to
I haven't seen the patch yet, but here are two thoughts:
- some tools may be incompatible with each other (e.g. ASan and TSan), so
we shouldn't allow to use them together;
- there are many users of TSan and ASan, thus we can't easily rename the
corresponding command line options. The right thing
14 matches
Mail list logo
