On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Ivan Krasin <kra...@google.com> wrote:
> Thank you, Richard. > > Shall I merge the newly introduced test/CodeGenCXX/ubsan-vtable-checks.cpp > into catch-undef-behavior.cpp or it's more clear when it's standalone? > Up to you. catch-undef-behavior.cpp is getting unwieldy, so a separate test file doesn't seem like a bad thing. > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> > wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Ivan Krasin via cfe-commits < >> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >>> krasin added a comment. >>> >>> Small correction: all UBSan type checks tests live in compiler-rt. >> >> >> Actually, most of the UBSan tests live in >> test/CodeGenCXX/catch-undef-behavior.cpp >> in Clang; the compiler-rt tests are merely aiming to test that the runtime >> produces the correct diagnostics. There are a few more test files testing >> UBSan besides that one; you can find the tests by grepping for "fsanitize=" >> in Clang's test/ directory. >> >> >>> There is a test for UBsan + devirtualization inside tools/clang. My >>> point still stands. >>> >>> >>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D26559 >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cfe-commits mailing list >>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org >>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits