search for: r249763

...implicit conversions and confirm they aren't > doing anything strange. Most easily done by applying the attached > patch, and getting this compiling again. I have some more commentary > in, e.g., r249767 and r249782. > > Some of the problems I've uncovered include r249758, r249763, r249764, > and more scary cases like r249925 and r250211. > > I've almost finished LLVM proper, but I haven't touched clang yet, or > other LLVM projects. > > Is there any contention about this? Do we eventually want to commit > this patch, or should we go back to our...

...and confirm they aren't >> doing anything strange. Most easily done by applying the attached >> patch, and getting this compiling again. I have some more commentary >> in, e.g., r249767 and r249782. >> >> Some of the problems I've uncovered include r249758, r249763, r249764, >> and more scary cases like r249925 and r250211. >> >> I've almost finished LLVM proper, but I haven't touched clang yet, or >> other LLVM projects. >> >> Is there any contention about this? Do we eventually want to commit >> this patc...

I've been digging into some undefined behaviour stemming from how ilist is typically configured. r247937, r247944, and r247978 caused a UBSan failure to start firing on our Green Dragon bots, and after an IRC conversation between David and Nick and Mehdi, we added a blacklist: -- $echo "src:$WORKSPACE/llvm/include/llvm/CodeGen/MachineFunction.h" >> sanitize.blacklist --