================
Comment at: tools/clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp:839
@@ -837,2 +838,3 @@
void ScalarExprEmitter::EmitBinOpCheck(Value *Check, const BinOpInfo &Info) {
+ assert(CGF.IsSanitizerScope);
StringRef CheckName;
----------------
Alexey Samsonov wrote:
> Richard Smith wrote:
> > Several callers of this are only guarding their call to this function; how
> > about sinking the `SanitizerScope` down into here (and teaching the scope
> > to cope with multiple `SanitizerScope` objects being live at once)?
> On the contrary, there are no callers that have `SanitizerScope` only to
> guard the call to this function. Consider:
> EmitBinOpCheck(Builder.CreateICmpULE(RHS, GetWidthMinusOneValue(Ops.LHS,
> RHS)), Ops);
> we want to attach metadata to ICmpULE instruction created in this line. This
> is my main motivation for using asserts instead of re-entrant sanitizer
> scopes - if one adds a new UBSan check and writes the code like:
> if (SanOpts->SanitizeFoo) {
> Bar = Builder.CreateBar();
> Baz = Builder.CreateBaz(Bar);
> EmitBinOpCheck(Baz, Info);
> }
> this will die with an assertion failure. If we allow multiple scopes, we
> won't notice missing metadata for bar and baz instructions.
Thanks, you're quite right :)
http://reviews.llvm.org/D4544
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
