================
@@ -44,13 +44,11 @@ bool NoSanitizeList::containsFunction(SanitizerMask Mask,
bool NoSanitizeList::containsFile(SanitizerMask Mask, StringRef FileName,
StringRef Category) const {
- unsigned NoSanLine = SSCL->inSectionBlame(Mask, "src", FileName, Category);
- if (NoSanLine == 0)
+ auto NoSan = SSCL->inSectionBlame(Mask, "src", FileName, Category);
+ if (NoSan == llvm::SpecialCaseList::NotFound)
return false;
- unsigned SanLine = SSCL->inSectionBlame(Mask, "src", FileName, "sanitize");
- // If we have two cases such as `src:a.cpp=sanitize` and `src:a.cpp`, the
- // current entry override the previous entry.
- return !SanLine || NoSanLine > SanLine;
+ auto San = SSCL->inSectionBlame(Mask, "src", FileName, "sanitize");
+ return San == llvm::SpecialCaseList::NotFound || NoSan > San;
----------------
vitalybuka wrote:
Does this mean `return San == llvm::SpecialCaseList::NotFound || NoSan > San;`
llvm::SpecialCaseList::NotFound is min possible value,
so `return NoSan > San;` is enough
However for readability I would keep as is.
Compiler likely will figure this out.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141640
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
