Displaying 1 result from an estimated 1 matches for "1020069".
2011 Dec 16
4
[LLVMdev] load widening conflicts with AddressSanitizer
On Dec 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
> > Do we consider the above transformation legal?
Yes, the transformation is perfectly legal for the normal compiler.
> > I would argue that it should not be legal. We don't actually know what
> > comes after the 22 byte object. Is it another memory object? A
> > memory-mapped I/O device? Unmapped memory?