On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:22:38PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
+ *gsi = create_cond_insert_point (gsi, /*before_p=*/true,
+ /*then_more_likely_p=*/false,
+ /*create_then_fallthru_edge=*/true,
+ then_bb,
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:55:50PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
On 12/16/13 11:43, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:40:16PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
It can be the last thing, sure. I think the still unimplemented and
potentially useful are the floating point overflow sanitization
On 12/19/13 09:42, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:55:50PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
On 12/16/13 11:43, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:40:16PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
It can be the last thing, sure. I think the still unimplemented and
potentially useful are
On 12/16/13 11:40, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:25:33AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
As you note, there's some question as to whether or not this should
be acceptable for 4.9. Yes it's well contained, but we really need
to draw the line. Is this the last thing for the sanitizers
On 12/14/13 12:53, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
2013-12-14 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
* ubsan.c: Include tree-ssanames.h, asan.h and gimplify-me.h.
(ubsan_type_descriptor): Handle BOOLEAN_TYPE and ENUMERAL_TYPE
like INTEGER_TYPE.
(instrument_bool_enum_load): New
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:40:16PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
It can be the last thing, sure. I think the still unimplemented and
potentially useful are the floating point overflow sanitization (haven't
looked yet what exactly it is, I suppose
On Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
It can be the last thing, sure. I think the still unimplemented and
potentially useful are the floating point overflow sanitization (haven't
looked yet what exactly it is, I suppose casts from floating point to
integers where the values are out of
On 12/14/13 12:53, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
This patch implements one of the few remaining missing ubsan
sanitizations, in particular instrumentation which complains about
loads of (non-bitfield) bool or enum (the latter in C++ only) value
that is outside of the range allowed (0/1 for bool,
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:25:33AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
As you note, there's some question as to whether or not this should
be acceptable for 4.9. Yes it's well contained, but we really need
to draw the line. Is this the last thing for the sanitizers that is
still under consideration?
It
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:40:16PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
It can be the last thing, sure. I think the still unimplemented and
potentially useful are the floating point overflow sanitization (haven't
looked yet what exactly it is, I suppose casts from floating point to
integers where the
On 12/16/13 11:43, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 07:40:16PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
It can be the last thing, sure. I think the still unimplemented and
potentially useful are the floating point overflow sanitization (haven't
looked yet what exactly it is, I suppose casts
Hi!
This patch implements one of the few remaining missing ubsan
sanitizations, in particular instrumentation which complains about
loads of (non-bitfield) bool or enum (the latter in C++ only) value
that is outside of the range allowed (0/1 for bool, min/max for
minimum precision integer type
12 matches
Mail list logo
