The patch passes bootstrap+test on x86_64 and found a few functions in
the source tree (attached func_names.txt) that could be annotated with
malloc (I gave a brief look at some of the functions and didn't appear
to be false positives but I will recheck thoroughly)
virtual char* libcp1::compiler::find(std::__cxx11::string&) const
The virtual on the list of your candidates gave me pause. Consider
this completely contrived example:
struct B {
virtual void* f (unsigned n) {
return new char [n];
}
};
void* foo (B &b, unsigned n)
{
return b.f (n);
}
Based on these definitions alone both functions are candidates
for attribute malloc.
But suppose foo is called with an object of a type derived from
B that overrides f() to do something wacky (but strictly not
invalid) like:
struct D: B {
char buf[32];
virtual void* f (unsigned n) {
if (n < 32)
return n <= 32 ? buf : B::f (n);
}
Breaking foo's attribute malloc constraint.
In other words, I think virtual functions need to be excluded
from the list (unless they're defined in a class marked final,
or unless we know they're not overridden to break the constraint
like above).
Martin
