Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "d17394".
Did you mean:
17394
2016 Jun 03
6
[RFC] Embedded bitcode and related upstream (Part II)
...ion of the source code. One solution will be keeping a list of all the options that can affect code generation but not encoded in the bitcode. I have internally prototyped with disallowing these options explicitly and allowed only the reminder of the options to be embedded (http://reviews.llvm.org/D17394 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D17394>). A better solution might be encoding that information in "Options.td" as specific group.
2. Assembly input handling:
This is a workaround to allow source code written in assembly to work with "-fembed-bitcode" options. When compiling asse...
2016 Jun 13
5
[RFC] Embedded bitcode and related upstream (Part II)
...ion of the source code. One solution will be keeping a list of all the options that can affect code generation but not encoded in the bitcode. I have internally prototyped with disallowing these options explicitly and allowed only the reminder of the options to be embedded (http://reviews.llvm.org/D17394 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D17394>). A better solution might be encoding that information in "Options.td" as specific group.
>
> This is really interesting. I'm not a particularly security minded person so I don't have a lot of commentary there. An explicit whitelist so...