@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
ojhunt wrote:
@cor3ntin the option selection down stream is a StringSwitch on the
authentication mode, and then a sequence of (not large, I think just two) `if
(option == constant)` checks to set up specific options.
Previous PRs have suggested maps, etc for such conditions, and a map of
opti
@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
ojhunt wrote:
@zahiraam none of these actually try to set FEM_Indeterminate, so far I cannot
find any way to make clang ever set that state and I can’t find a way for
source code to do so either - it looks like in the past the fpcontrol pragma
could induce it, but none of the examples still do
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From b3de41c15edc527154e461e5b0df61642599b45e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 01:43:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptraut
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From 21dc6e5a5c9762292bc135c62c6b442dc18908b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:26:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptrauth
T
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From f5b7cf409e3518f79ac6fce5d01876a51ae6f4e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:26:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptrauth
T
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From d32a1bd141a668a2d8e8c6315a38506c7e1be4c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:26:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptrauth
T
ojhunt wrote:
Yeah, clang-15 seems to be the only time we would ever produce -1:
https://godbolt.org/z/7M61eff4f
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@AaronBallman do you have any further requests or changes for this PR?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100830
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@AaronBallman are you ok with this now? I'm re-requesting the review as it's
been a while, and I want to confirm I addressed things as you wanted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117428
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@l
ojhunt wrote:
> > I just noticed there's no documentation for
> > `__builtin_virtual_member_address()` so I'm addressing that.
> > Due to code drift and time I realized that they disagree as to whether they
> > should take `C*` or `C&` so I'm going to make them both accept either
> > (existing
ojhunt wrote:
> > I just noticed there's no documentation for
> > `__builtin_virtual_member_address()` so I'm addressing that.
> > Due to code drift and time I realized that they disagree as to whether they
> > should take `C*` or `C&` so I'm going to make them both accept either
> > (existing
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135562
If clang is configured to apply pointer authentication to type_info's vtable
pointer we
ensure that the selected schema is applied to the RTTI objects generated for
objc++.
>From 5dc1e5fbb57f88e412e044605d8fe30
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked down a new and spurious "This variable is used uninitialized"
> to this PR. I'm working on a reduced test case now. It looks like this:
>
> ```
> .cpp:XXX+2:13: error: variable 'new_section' is uninitialized when
> used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
> 572 |
ojhunt wrote:
> I'm confused -- how is there existing code depending on a builtin which
> doesn't yet exist in Clang? Are we copying these builtins from somewhere else?
This is part of the pointer authentication support we are upstreaming, all of
which has been in use for a long time, just not
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked down a new and spurious "This variable is used uninitialized"
> to this PR. I'm working on a reduced test case now. It looks like this:
>
> ```
> .cpp:XXX+2:13: error: variable 'new_section' is uninitialized when
> used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
> 572 |
https://github.com/ojhunt edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
These are a pair of builtins to support particularly weird edge case operations
while correctly handling the non-trivial implicit pointer authentication
schemas applied to polymorphic members.
>From 6e1d13805da
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64e-apple-ios -fptrauth-calls -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes
CHECK,CHECK-AUTH
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64-apple-ios -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %
ojhunt wrote:
I just noticed there's no documentation for
`__builtin_virtual_member_address()` so I'm addressing that.
Due to code drift and time I realized that they disagree as to whether they
should take `C*` or `C&` so I'm going to make them both accept either (existing
code means we can'
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138482
This adds a number of builtins to query the ptrauth schema of an arbitrary type
in a way that can be fed into other ptrauth qualifiers.
>From e84310f8a57a3f9b75dfc7260137e984d7f55f87 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Fro
ojhunt wrote:
Adding @cor3ntin and @AaronBallman in case they have a better idea for getting
the function key to Sema than having it duplicated in langopts and codegen
options
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138482
___
cfe-commits mailing l
ojhunt wrote:
Also the associated tests do not pass yet as they're blocked on
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828 and other ptrauth PRs
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138482
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.o
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
>From b12d78087c521d61f3e078d5a0d79889b17fbde9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 16:17:15 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Ensure type aware allocators handle transparent
decl co
ojhunt wrote:
> Can you add tests? Thanks
sigh, I thought I had :D please hold
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@AaronBallman @zahiraam given we do not support FEM_Indeterminate, and there
appears to be no way to actually get clang into the state anyway, I think that
the correct thing to do is to remove it and work out had to get this to
cooperate with the OPTION macro if we ever do add s
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From b3de41c15edc527154e461e5b0df61642599b45e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 01:43:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptraut
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
>From a52df39baea119a5a7b13dd8d98dd145522f6293 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 13:30:40 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Remove FEM_Indeterminable
Remove FEM_Indeterminable as
ojhunt wrote:
Two of the fixes were to code that was removed while resolving the merge
conflict on the LANG_OPT declaration, I thought with the revert of c2a62af I
got all the changes but I'll recheck
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
ojhunt wrote:
Just waiting on a build (force push was due to me hopelessly screwing up my
tree)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cf
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
> @ojhunt In #137600 there are a list of a few temporary PRs that were merged
> in to silence the warning. These need to be reverted after this one gets
> merged in. Do you want to revert them or you want me to do that?
I removed them as part of resolving the merge conflict, and
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138341
When merging the fix for FEM_Indeterminate I reverted the follow on warning
fixes, but misread this diff and retained the explicitly defaulted constructor.
>From f8a05ddf95c4efa963411694f49fa235e59c3d5c Mon Sep
ojhunt wrote:
@zahiraam missed this while reverting :-O
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138341
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138341
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
We were testing the immediate DeclContext for found new and delete operators,
which is incorrect if the declarations are contained by a transparent decl as
can be induced with extern or export statements.
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
This PR adds support for an 'options' parameter for the __ptrauth qualifier.
The initial version only exposes the authehntication modes:
* "strip"
* "sign-and-strip"
* "sign-and-auth"
There are other options
ojhunt wrote:
The tests in this PR are dependent on #136828, and the included tests have
non-sequential numbers as the tests include other options that are not
supported by this PR, to try and limit the complexity of this PR to just the
parsing and existing functionality.
https://github.com/l
@@ -8374,20 +8376,191 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
@@ -8374,20 +8376,191 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
@@ -8374,20 +8376,191 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
ojhunt wrote:
This PR is a draft as it will need to be updated to merged correctly, and
verify test output (conflicts, unintentional mismatches coming from splitting
out the PR) after #136828
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
___
cfe-c
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From b3de41c15edc527154e461e5b0df61642599b45e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 01:43:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptraut
@@ -8350,14 +8350,16 @@ static void HandleNeonVectorTypeAttr(QualType &CurType,
const ParsedAttr &Attr,
/// Handle the __ptrauth qualifier.
static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx, QualType &T,
const ParsedAttr &Attr, Sema &S) {
-
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked two more issues to this commit. Both only manifest when using
> Clang header modules, which likely means that AST serialization is somehow
> incorrect after this patch. I'm reducing one of the test cases now, but it's
> taking a lot of time. In the meantime, ple
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked two more issues to this commit. Both only manifest when using
> Clang header modules, which likely means that AST serialization is somehow
> incorrect after this patch. I'm reducing one of the test cases now, but it's
> taking a lot of time. In the meantime, ple
https://github.com/ojhunt ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
>From dec6509a54940fdda77577c9d07e1c061701ab75 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 18:09:22 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][p2719] Module deserialization does not restore
allocator f
ojhunt wrote:
Ok, added PCH and module tests - verified both tests fail without this fix to
the serialization, and they pass now.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.ll
ojhunt wrote:
@alexfh yeah I think I found the issue, would you mind trying
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102 ? (need to work on tests but
wanted you to be able to test quickly - I'm currently waiting on a fresh build
alas so the PR is currently done blind)
https://github.com/l
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
When serializing and deserializing a FunctionDecl we don't recover whether or
not the decl was a type aware allocator or destroying delete, because in the
final PR that information was placed in a side table in
ojhunt wrote:
> Do we need to do anything special for constant expression handling?
I do not believe so as pointer auth does not occur during consteval, but I'll
see if we have any additional existing tests that I haven't included here. If
not I'll add some new ones:
- [ ] Type checking (e.g.
https://github.com/ojhunt edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136783
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -2801,6 +2801,10 @@ static bool isTriviallyCopyableTypeImpl(const QualType
&type,
if (type.hasNonTrivialObjCLifetime())
return false;
+ QualType::PrimitiveCopyKind PCK = type.isNonTrivialToPrimitiveCopy();
+ if (PCK != QualType::PCK_Trivial && PCK != QualType::PCK_
ojhunt wrote:
> Oof. On the one hand, we don't want to break your existing users. On the
> other hand, we don't want to force the much broader audience of users into a
> worse interface. Are those uses in your downstream able to use things like
> fix-its to switch from the reference-based inte
https://github.com/ojhunt converted_to_draft
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
pending the above changes I'll remove the review flag so people aren't confused
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-c
@@ -5349,6 +5350,40 @@ RValue CodeGenFunction::EmitBuiltinExpr(const GlobalDecl
GD, unsigned BuiltinID,
return RValue::get(Result);
}
+ case Builtin::BI__builtin_virtual_member_address: {
+Address This = EmitLValue(E->getArg(0)).getAddress();
+APValue ConstMemF
@@ -5349,6 +5350,40 @@ RValue CodeGenFunction::EmitBuiltinExpr(const GlobalDecl
GD, unsigned BuiltinID,
return RValue::get(Result);
}
+ case Builtin::BI__builtin_virtual_member_address: {
+Address This = EmitLValue(E->getArg(0)).getAddress();
+APValue ConstMemF
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64e-apple-ios -fptrauth-calls -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes
CHECK,CHECK-AUTH
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64-apple-ios -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %
@@ -1782,6 +1782,92 @@ static ExprResult PointerAuthStringDiscriminator(Sema
&S, CallExpr *Call) {
return Call;
}
+static ExprResult VirtualMemberAddress(Sema &S, CallExpr *Call) {
+ if (S.checkArgCount(Call, 2))
+return ExprError();
+
+ for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i) {
@@ -1782,6 +1782,92 @@ static ExprResult PointerAuthStringDiscriminator(Sema
&S, CallExpr *Call) {
return Call;
}
+static ExprResult VirtualMemberAddress(Sema &S, CallExpr *Call) {
+ if (S.checkArgCount(Call, 2))
+return ExprError();
+
+ for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i) {
ojhunt wrote:
It's even more dumb, but I have this fixed and am writing tests
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -16421,33 +16715,70 @@ CheckOperatorDeleteDeclaration(Sema &SemaRef,
FunctionDecl *FnDecl) {
return true;
auto *MD = dyn_cast(FnDecl);
+ auto ConstructDestroyingDeleteAddressType = [&]() {
+assert(MD);
+return SemaRef.Context.getCanonicalType(SemaRef.Context
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135686
The P2719 implementation refactored diagnostics for cleanup delete, and as part
of that I attempted to fix handling of inaccessible cleanup operator delete.
Alas the new branch was incorrect as it was performing
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
>From 5f260726253e78a00d2dff02c22837ce02b49075 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 11:55:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] [Clang] Consider preferred_type in bitfield warnings
(#116760)
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
>From 5f260726253e78a00d2dff02c22837ce02b49075 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 11:55:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/8] [Clang] Consider preferred_type in bitfield warnings
(#116760)
@@ -0,0 +1,414 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-apple-darwin10 -fsyntax-only -verify
-std=c++23 -Wno-unused-value -Wno-unused-but-set-variable
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-apple-darwin10 -fsyntax-only
-verify=expected,bitfieldwarnings -std=c++23 -Wno-unused-valu
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
>From 5f260726253e78a00d2dff02c22837ce02b49075 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 11:55:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/9] [Clang] Consider preferred_type in bitfield warnings
(#116760)
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
>From 3c20ae33d51c4e8e7a80e7f1477de02c02dec513 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ahmed Bougacha
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 08:00:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add builtin_get_vtable_pointer and
virtual_member_addre
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
>From e03f70335defeba6b5e173618b01ed8e3876034a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 00:47:18 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add builtin_get_vtable_pointer and
virtual_member_address
https://github.com/ojhunt edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137580
__ptrauth_restricted_intptr provides a mechanism to apply pointer
authentication to pointer sized integer types.
>From 7af378bbec4c7cf3896f6f7bc95d816e398930f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: S
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64-apple-ios -fptrauth-calls
-fptrauth-intrinsics -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple aarch64-linux-gnu -fptrauth-calls
-fptrauth-intrinsics -fsyntax-only -verify %s
+
ojhunt wrote:
Given there ar
ojhunt wrote:
Ah, slot FLT_EVAL_METHOD is used in source as well, in that case I think the
fix is to make signed options an option (pun intended)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
ojhunt wrote:
although, what happens currently? Per the warning we should be producing the
wrong value if there's a direct enum value to code visible value mapping
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commi
ojhunt wrote:
Warning fix is tracked by https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commit
ojhunt wrote:
> Perhaps silly initial question: why do we need a whole different qualifier
> for this? Why can you not write `__ptrauth uintptr_t foo`?
Not a silly question, back when first implemented we spent time thinking about
this.
The concern was basically `T* __ptrauth(...)` can repres
ojhunt wrote:
> > > > > @zahiraam @AaronBallman a different option would be to add a signed
> > > > > vs unsigned storage option to the `OPTION` and `BENIGN_ENUM_LANGOPT`
> > > > > macros so we can store negative enumerations safely
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think I would prefer this solution
ojhunt wrote:
> > I think this is a reasonable way forward for right now; we can bring back
> > the enumerator once we're actually using it. WDYT @zahiraam ?
>
> I tend to think so too. But I am waiting for a response from the math library
> people internally to make sure that we don't loose c
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138376
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
> LGTM, but I have only done a very isolated change on this code before.
Righto, I'll wait for @zahiraam and/or @AaronBallman as well
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138374
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.or
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138372
Per the feedback from the Clang Area Team, this PR makes P2719 only on by
default when targeting C++26, and adds a flag to explicitly enable or disable
support.
>From ce3630845859d8771ec112c1c091134953bac7c5 Mo
ojhunt wrote:
Adding @AaronBallman and @cor3ntin as reviewers as you were the primary
reviewers for the main PR, and I can't recall which of you requested I remove
the flag and c++26 gating :D
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138372
___
cfe-
ojhunt wrote:
(I'm still waiting for the full test suite to finish running, boy howdy does it
take a long time :D)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138372
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138374
While investigating the recent warnings around FEM_Indeterminate I noticed that
the macro name for FPOptions.def was given the very generic name `OPTION`.
This PR renames it to FP_OPTION instead.
>From f3351a66
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138374
>From 60eeaf0edd0a58bcdac4afad44ed097efdcd83f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 19:20:27 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] rename FPOptions.def's macro to FP_OPTION
While investigati
ojhunt wrote:
> I realize you've got downstream users making use of this additional
> qualifier. Can you mention how prevalent the use is?
it's used a bunch in libcxx, libcxxabi, libunwind, compiler-rt and a few other
places. We can obviously use a macro to wrap this, but we need to have a wa
ojhunt wrote:
@AaronBallman have you made a decision? (if the keyword has to go away I need
to replace all the tests and work out how to integrate with other libraries
downstream in a way that works in both modes)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137580
___
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier ,
=?utf-8?q?Félix?= Cloutier
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
ojhunt wrote:
The pointer auth options PR would also benefit from this - it currently has an
ad hoc and restricted version of this as it needed to support
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138376
When parsing a function pointer typed field we use
Parser::ParseTypeQualifierListOpt, but then drops subsequent type attributes
and qualifiers unless explicitly handled.
There is an existing solution for the _A
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From d51ed1b628eac11e3ff1a2bb5fffd87e7ca127ea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:26:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptrauth
T
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137580
>From 9c29520abea852086f8f4c555e2ad1ea7c711800 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2025 22:33:44 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add `__ptrauth_restricted_intptr` qualifier
__ptrauth_rest
https://github.com/ojhunt edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137580
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -162,3 +162,8 @@ struct A {
};
A<0>::B a;
}
+
+template void shadow9() { // expected-note{{template parameter
is declared here}}
+ using arr = int[1]; // expected-warning@+1 {{decomposition declarations are
a C++17 extension}}
+ auto [T] = arr{}; // expected-error {{de
201 - 300 of 431 matches
Mail list logo
