Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "address_safeti".
Did you mean:
address_safety
2012 Jan 24
0
[LLVMdev] load widening conflicts with AddressSanitizer
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
> Hi Kostya,
>
> > [resurrecting an old mail thread about AddressSanitizer false positive
> caused by
> > load widening]
> >
> > Once the Attribute::AddressSafety is set by clang (a separate patch),
> fixing
> > this bug may look as simple as this:
>
> Hi Duncan,
>
2012 Jan 24
2
[LLVMdev] load widening conflicts with AddressSanitizer
Hi Kostya,
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr
> <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>> wrote:
>
> Hi Kostya,
>
> > [resurrecting an old mail thread about AddressSanitizer false positive
> caused by
> > load widening]
> >
> > Once the Attribute::AddressSafety is set by clang (a separate
2012 Nov 16
0
[LLVMdev] Two questions about pass managers and passes
Hello All,
I have two questions, one more of an implementation question, the other more a design question.
First: I noticed that if one moves the FPPassManager::doInitialization(Module) call from FPPassManager::runOnModule to MPPassManager::runOnModule (which is the new location I am aiming for to avoid the need for a doInitialization/doFinalization outside of the run methods, as preferred by
2012 Nov 16
0
[LLVMdev] Two questions regarding pass managers and passes
Hello All,
I have two questions, one more of an implementation question, the other more a design question.
First: I noticed that if one moves the FPPassManager::doInitialization(Module) call from FPPassManager::runOnModule to MPPassManager::runOnModule (which is the new location I am aiming for to avoid the need for a doInitialization/doFinalization outside of the run methods, as preferred by
2012 Jan 24
4
[LLVMdev] load widening conflicts with AddressSanitizer
Hi Kostya,
> [resurrecting an old mail thread about AddressSanitizer false positive caused by
> load widening]
>
> Once the Attribute::AddressSafety is set by clang (a separate patch), fixing
> this bug may look as simple as this:
I don't get the point of an attribute. There's plenty of code out there
that does wide loads like this directly (without them being created by
2012 Jan 24
0
[LLVMdev] load widening conflicts with AddressSanitizer
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
> Hi Kostya,
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr
>> <mailto:baldrick at free.fr>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kostya,
>>
>> > [resurrecting an old mail thread about AddressSanitizer false
>> positive
>> caused by