daniel-petrovic wrote:

> I'm reluctant to accept the patch as-is, though the latest approach makes 
> sense.
> 
> I want to question if people would write such paranoid recursive template 
> arguments in real world codebase - the issue was fuzzer generated.
> 
> I'm not saying this is not a bug, I wonder if doing so would also require us 
> to revisit every recursive calls and add guards here and there?

Thanks for the feedback. 

IMO Parser should be robust against all syntactically valid inputs, including 
those from code generators or fuzzers. Currently this specific path lacks the 
standard stack guard used elsewhere.

Regarding your concern about scope:  I don't believe fixing one guard that 
caused this specific issue implies auditing every other recursive call.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/224393
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to