mgrang added a comment. In D50488#1400823 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D50488#1400823>, @whisperity wrote:
> Yeah, it seems upstream has moved away due to @Szelethus' implementation of a > much more manageable "checker dependency" system. You most likely will have > to rebase your patch first, then check what you missed which got added to > other merged, existing checkers. Yes, I see that D55429 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55429>, D54438 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D54438> added a new dependency field for checkers. However, I see that not all checkers need/have that field. In this case, shouldn't providing a ento::shouldRegisterPointerSortingChecker function which returns true be enough to register the checker? Moreover, as I said I hit this assert only when invoking the checker via csa-testbench. Outside that it seems to work fine. For example, my unit test Analysis/ptr-sort.cpp passes. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D50488/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D50488 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
