aeubanks added a comment. In D79698#2037305 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D79698#2037305>, @leonardchan wrote:
> Just to followup on this: We believe the root cause of the error we're > running into is that some sancov guards in one comdat are being referenced by > symbols in another comdat, so due to linking order, the other comdat in > question is referencing a sancov guard that was in a discarded comdat group. > I posted full details of this on llvm-dev > <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-May/141583.html>. We believe > we're running into this error now because with this patch, inlining occurs > after the sanitizers are run. > > Based on some discussion in > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-May/141558.html, it seems > appropriate that the solution for this is to just run sanitizers after > inlining, so we would avoid this error that's brought about by inlining after > sanitizer runs. Since this has been breaking us for a few days, and unless > other folks don't mind, I'm thinking it might be appropriate to temporarily > revert this until there's a fix for either Maybe the fix is to use `registerScalarOptimizerLateEPCallback()` instead of `registerPipelineStartEPCallback()`. But I'm not sure how to test that, could you try that and lmk if that fixes the issue? > (1) running sanitizers after inlining or > (2) changing which comdat groups the sancov guards get placed in (such that > guards in one group aren't referenced by functions defined in another group) > > I'm not sure how long it would take to implement either solution, so I think > temporarily reverting might be ok here. Sure, feel free to revert. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D79698/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D79698 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
