fjricci added a comment.
On platforms where `BOOL` == `signed char`, is it actually undefined behavior
(or is it just bad programming practice) to store a value other than 0 or 1 in
your `BOOL`? I can't find any language specs suggesting that it is, and given
that it's just a typedef for a `sig
fjricci added a comment.
Awesome, good to know. Thanks!
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27607
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
fjricci created this revision.
Stand-alone leak sanitizer builds are supported with -fsanitize=leak,
adds an attribute for consistency with the rest of the sanitizer attributes.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210
Files:
lib/Lex/PPMacroExpansion.cpp
test/Lexer/has_feature_leak_sanitizer.cpp
I
fjricci added a comment.
Currently, the way that we tell users to gate on sanitizer-specific behavior is
with `__has_feature(foo_sanitizer)`, as far as I know, it's the only way to do
so. LSan provides several API functions for users, ie `__lsan_ignore_object`.
If a user program wants to use th
fjricci abandoned this revision.
fjricci added a comment.
Weak hooks do provide a good solution, abandoning for now (although it may need
to be reconsidered if we get a windows LSan port up and running).
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210
___
cfe-comm
fjricci reclaimed this revision.
fjricci added a comment.
As I've looked into this further, I do think we need
`has_feature(leak_sanitizer)` after all. For example, if a user program calls
`pthread_create()` with a custom stack size, leak sanitizer will intercept the
call to `pthread_create()`,
fjricci added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChain.cpp:851
+ XOpenMPTargetArg->setBaseArg(A);
+ A = XOpenMPTargetArg.release();
+ DAL->append(A);
Hahnfeld wrote:
> This is a memory leak that is currently triggered in
> `tests/Driver/o
fjricci added a comment.
Please add a test for this.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36482
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
fjricci created this revision.
Support for leak sanitizer on darwin has been added to
compiler-rt, this patch adds compiler support.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32192
Files:
lib/Driver/ToolChains/Darwin.cpp
Index: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Darwin.cpp
==
fjricci added a comment.
Yeah, I think that makes sense. Life will get a bit tricky when Windows support
gets added and we can't use weak hooks to determine whether LSan is running,
but I'm sure there's a way to handle that.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210
__
fjricci added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210#804084, @smeenai wrote:
> COFF supports weak externals: https://stackoverflow.com/a/11529277/382079.
> Would it suffice here?
Looks like it could work, thanks.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D34210
_
fjricci updated this revision to Diff 95986.
fjricci added a comment.
Add test cases
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32192
Files:
lib/Driver/ToolChains/Darwin.cpp
test/Driver/fsanitize.c
test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c
Index: test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c
=
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL300894: Enable leak sanitizer builds for darwin (authored by
fjricci).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32192?vs=95986&id=96019#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D32
13 matches
Mail list logo