eugenis added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/Driver/memtag_lto.c:126 + // XUNSAFE: [4]: full-set + // XSAFE: [4]: [0,4) int x; ---------------- vitalybuka wrote: > eugenis wrote: > > Alloca order can easily change in the future. Not sure how to make this > > better. Perhaps simply remove the numbers and test that the function has > > one alloca with [0, 4) and one with [0, 1)? This looks specific enough. > -DAG? Well, that, but also the actual numbers "[1]" and "[4]". Where are "2" and "3", and how likely is 4 to turn into 5 in the future? ================ Comment at: llvm/lib/Analysis/StackSafetyAnalysis.cpp:193 GVToSSI Info; + std::unordered_set<const AllocaInst *> SafeAllocas; }; ---------------- SmallPtrSet? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80771/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80771 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
