http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-21
20:21:02 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Nov 21 20:20:42 2012
New Revision: 193704
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193704
Log:
Define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ for -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
--- Comment #5 from Konstantin Serebryany 2012-11-20 05:46:06 UTC ---
Then it should probably *not* be named _ADDRESS_SANITIZER
(imagine a user trying to understand why ADDRESS_SANITIZER works for him
with clang, where he added -DADDRESS_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-20 05:37:18
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
>
> If we end up implementing a macro, may I ask it to be named
> ADDRESS_SANITIZER?
> This name is already used in a few places (Chromium, WebKit, etc).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
Konstantin Serebryany changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dnovillo at google dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2012-11-20
05:23:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Note that this will be incompatible with what clang uses
> (http://clang.llvm.org/docs/AddressSanitizer.html#has_feature)
> Clang will never use a CP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
Konstantin Serebryany changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||konstantin.s.serebryany at
