vsk added a comment. One question for Anna (inline). I will update the diff with the documentation/code comments/renaming fixes once I hear back. Thanks again for the comments!
================ Comment at: docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.rst:101 + ``-fsanitize=nullability-assign``, and the argument check with + ``-fsanitize=nullability-arg``. While violating nullability rules does + not result in undefined behavior, it is often unintentional, so UBSan ---------------- zaks.anna wrote: > Have you investigated if -fsanitize=nullability-arg is too noisy? I think we > should somehow "recommend" return and assignment check to most users. This is > not clear from the help and options provided. The main concern here is that > someone would try -fsanitize=nullability, see a ton of warnings they don't > care about and think that the whole check is too noisy. > > I cannot come up with a great solution. Options that come into mind are: > - Drop "arg" check completely. > - Remove arg from the nullability group. > - Have 2 groups for nullability. > > We can also wait for concrete data before making a decision here and address > this in subsequent commits. The nullability-arg check was not noisy on a small sample (n=4) of Apple-internal projects. I only collected 11 diagnostics in total, all of which seemed actionable. I.e the issues were not isolated to system headers: the project code actually did violate arg nullability. Based on what I've seen so far, I'd like to start off with including the arg check in a "nullability-full" group. If arg check noisiness becomes an issue, then I'd like to create a new "nullability-partial" group with just the return/assignment checks. TL;DR: let's rename -fsanitize=nullability to -fsanitize=nullability-full, keep the arg check, and introduce a nullability-partial group later if we need to. Wdyt? https://reviews.llvm.org/D30762 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
