[PATCH] D27607: [ubsan] Treat ObjC's BOOL as if its range is always {0, 1}

fjricci added a comment. Awesome, good to know. Thanks! Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D27607 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D27607: [ubsan] Treat ObjC's BOOL as if its range is always {0, 1}

fjricci added a comment. On platforms where `BOOL` == `signed char`, is it actually undefined behavior (or is it just bad programming practice) to store a value other than 0 or 1 in your `BOOL`? I can't find any language specs suggesting that it is, and given that it's just a typedef for a

[PATCH] D34784: [OpenMP] Add flag for specifying the target device architecture for OpenMP device offloading

fjricci added inline comments. Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChain.cpp:851 + XOpenMPTargetArg->setBaseArg(A); + A = XOpenMPTargetArg.release(); + DAL->append(A); Hahnfeld wrote: > This is a memory leak that is currently triggered in >

[PATCH] D36482: Enable SanitizerKind::Vptr on NetBSD/X86 and X86_64

fjricci added a comment. Please add a test for this. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D36482 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D34210: Add __has_feature(leak_sanitizer)

fjricci added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210#804084, @smeenai wrote: > COFF supports weak externals: https://stackoverflow.com/a/11529277/382079. > Would it suffice here? Looks like it could work, thanks. https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210

[PATCH] D34210: Add __has_feature(leak_sanitizer)

fjricci reclaimed this revision. fjricci added a comment. As I've looked into this further, I do think we need `has_feature(leak_sanitizer)` after all. For example, if a user program calls `pthread_create()` with a custom stack size, leak sanitizer will intercept the call to

[PATCH] D34210: Add __has_feature(leak_sanitizer)

fjricci abandoned this revision. fjricci added a comment. Weak hooks do provide a good solution, abandoning for now (although it may need to be reconsidered if we get a windows LSan port up and running). https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210 ___

[PATCH] D34210: Add __has_feature(leak_sanitizer)

fjricci added a comment. Currently, the way that we tell users to gate on sanitizer-specific behavior is with `__has_feature(foo_sanitizer)`, as far as I know, it's the only way to do so. LSan provides several API functions for users, ie `__lsan_ignore_object`. If a user program wants to use

[PATCH] D34210: Add __has_feature(leak_sanitizer)

fjricci created this revision. Stand-alone leak sanitizer builds are supported with -fsanitize=leak, adds an attribute for consistency with the rest of the sanitizer attributes. https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210 Files: lib/Lex/PPMacroExpansion.cpp test/Lexer/has_feature_leak_sanitizer.cpp

[PATCH] D32192: Enable leak sanitizer builds for darwin

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL300894: Enable leak sanitizer builds for darwin (authored by fjricci). Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32192?vs=95986=96019#toc Repository: rL LLVM

[PATCH] D32192: Enable leak sanitizer builds for darwin

fjricci updated this revision to Diff 95986. fjricci added a comment. Add test cases https://reviews.llvm.org/D32192 Files: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Darwin.cpp test/Driver/fsanitize.c test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c Index: test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c

[PATCH] D32192: Enable leak sanitizer builds for darwin

fjricci created this revision. Support for leak sanitizer on darwin has been added to compiler-rt, this patch adds compiler support. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32192 Files: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Darwin.cpp Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Darwin.cpp