Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "dereferenceable_on_entri".
Did you mean:
dereferenceable_on_entry
2018 Jul 12
2
[RFC] A nofree (and nosynch) function attribute: Mixing dereferenceable and delete
Thanks, Richard.
Based on the feedback from this thread, I'll move forward with the
patches for nofree, nosync, adding a new corresponding dereferenceable
attribute (my suggestion is to name this dereferenceable_on_entry;
suggestions welcome), and updating Clang is emit this new attribute
instead of the current one.
-Hal
On 07/11/2018 06:43 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018
2018 Jul 11
3
[RFC] A nofree (and nosynch) function attribute: Mixing dereferenceable and delete
[+Richard]
On 07/11/2018 08:29 AM, Sanjoy Das wrote:
> I'm not sure if nosynch is sufficient. What if we had:
>
> void f(int& x) {
> if (false) {
> int r0 = x;
> }
> }
>
> // other thread
> free(<pointer to x>);
>
> The source program is race free, but LLVM may speculate the read from
> x (seeing that it is dereferenceable) creating a