http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56454
--- Comment #13 from Kostya Serebryany <kcc at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-28 12:36:12 UTC --- > 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 That would be awesome! > (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?). no_sanitize_thread is actually not implemented in clang either yet (i.e. clang understands this attribute, but the instrumentation ignores it) The plan is to not instrument plain loads/stores when the attribute is set, while still instrumenting atomics and function entry/exit. > > OT, are you ok with incrementing the kMidMemEnd value (see my mail from Friday > last week)? Sorry, I missed the message. replied there.
