================
@@ -194,12 +198,43 @@ Some issues with flags can be debugged using the
``verbosity=$NUM`` flag:
misspelled_flag
...
-Disabling
----------
+Disabling and suppressing
+-------------------------
-In some circumstances, you may want to suppress error reporting in a specific
scope.
+There are multiple ways to disable error reporting when using
RealtimeSanitizer.
-In C++, this is achieved via ``__rtsan::ScopedDisabler``. Within the scope
where the ``ScopedDisabler`` object is instantiated, all sanitizer error
reports are suppressed. This suppression applies to the current scope as well
as all invoked functions, including any functions called transitively.
+In general, ``ScopedDisabler`` should be preferred, as it is the most
performant.
+
+.. list-table:: Suppression methods
+ :widths: 30 15 15 10 70
+ :header-rows: 1
+
+ * - Method
+ - Specified at?
+ - Scope
+ - Run-time cost
+ - Description
+ * - ``ScopedDisabler``
+ - Compile-time
+ - Stack
+ - Very low
+ - Violations are ignored for the lifetime of the ``ScopedDisabler``
object.
+ * - ``function-name-matches`` suppression
+ - Run-time
+ - Single function
+ - Medium
+ - Suppresses intercepted and ``[[clang::blocking]]`` function calls by
name.
+ * - ``call-stack-contains`` suppression
+ - Run-time
+ - Stack
+ - High
+ - Suppresses any stack trace contaning the specified pattern.
+
+
+``ScopedDisabler``
+##################
+
+At compile time, RealtimeSanitizer may be disabled using
``__rtsan::ScopedDisabler``. Within the scope where the ``ScopedDisabler``
object is instantiated, all potential RTSan errors are ignored for that thread
including all invoked functions, and any functions called transitively.
----------------
davidtrevelyan wrote:
Minor nits: not sure the word "potential" adds value here (it raises
questions), and I think "for that thread" and "invoked functions" are a given
as we're already talking about a variable scope. I'd propose a simplification
as follows:
_All RTSan errors originating within the ``ScopedDisabler`` instance variable
scope are ignored._
I don't feel strongly though, if you feel this is less clear - no worries.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112727
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
