filcab added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D25199#560061, @vsk wrote:
> My question was about whether it's possible to resume normal program > execution after printing the stack trace from the segv handler. I had assumed > this is not possible, and (mistakenly) thought that you were suggesting this > approach. I guess we can eventually add a warning if you have this check + trap-function. If there's really a need for it. > UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst:122 > + - ``-fsanitize=value-after-delete``: Set the value of the pointer > + passed in a delete expression to 0xDEADBEEF. > - ``-fsanitize=vla-bound``: A variable-length array whose bound Why just `delete` and not `free()`? > CGExprScalar.cpp:416 > + if (arg->IgnoreImplicit()->isLValue() && > + !arg->HasSideEffects(CGF.getContext())) { > + LValue LHS = EmitLValue(arg); Missing a test for this condition. > sanitize-value-after-delete.cpp:2 > +// Test -fsanitize-value-after-delete > +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -O3 -fsanitize=value-after-delete -disable-llvm-optzns > -std=c++11 -triple=x86_64-pc-linux -emit-llvm -o - %s | FileCheck %s > + Please keep the test simple. You don't even need C++11 (in addition to the flags vsk mentioned). > sanitize-value-after-delete.cpp:22 > +// CHECK: store {{.*}} inttoptr (i64 -2401053088876216593 {{.*}} %p2 > +// CHECK-NOT: store {{.*}} inttoptr (i64 -2401053088876216593 {{.*}} %p2 > +// CHECK-LABEL: DO_NOT_MODIFY Why? https://reviews.llvm.org/D25199 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits