http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56454
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-28 12:13:42 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > Created attachment 29550 [details] > rename no_address_safety_analysis to no_sanitize_address > > How do we decide? When is the deadline for 4.8? > I've attached a patch that implements the new attribute and renames it > in the tests and in the docs, but still understands the old name > > (I will not be able to submit the patch until March 11) This doesn't DTRT with the old attribute, because you lookup_attribute only the new name. Either you'd need to look up also the old name, or handle_no_address_safety_attribute would need to add the new name of the attribute manually (and perhaps don't add the old name). I can take care of it (and perhaps also introduce no_sanitize_thread attribute - what exactly should be done when it is set? Instrument atomics always, and not instrument anything else?). OT, are you ok with incrementing the kMidMemEnd value (see my mail from Friday last week)?
