vitalybuka added a comment.
In D143675#4281673 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143675#4281673>, @rsundahl wrote:
> @kcc @eugenis @MaskRay @vitalybuka Ok to go with this? All new functionality
> is under the added flag so not expecting any surprises.
I don't have reasons to block this.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td:1785
HelpText<"Use default code
inlining logic for the address sanitizer">;
+def fsanitize_address_stable_abi : Flag<["-"], "fsanitize-address-stable-abi">,
+ Group<f_clang_Group>,
----------------
how likely you will need thus for other sanitizers in future
should this be rather -fsanitize-stable-abi which is ignore for now for other
sanitizers?
================
Comment at: compiler-rt/lib/asabi/CMakeLists.txt:2
+# Build for the ASAN Stable ABI runtime support library.
+set(ASABI_SOURCES
+ asabi_shim.cpp
----------------
does it need to be asabi?
maybe better asan_abi, files and macro?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D143675/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D143675
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
