tangyouling added inline comments.
================ Comment at: compiler-rt/lib/lsan/lsan_common.cpp:281 +# elif defined(__loongarch_lp64) + return ((p >> 47) == 0); # else ---------------- xen0n wrote: > Since our VM layout is actually flexible, would it be better to document > this, like "Support only the most common VM layout on LoongArch that allows > 47 bits of user-space VMA"? Exact wording could be optimized, I'm only > describing the gist here. > Since our VM layout is actually flexible, would it be better to document > this, like "Support only the most common VM layout on LoongArch that allows > 47 bits of user-space VMA"? Exact wording could be optimized, I'm only > describing the gist here. How about "Allow 47-bit user-space VMA at current"? ================ Comment at: compiler-rt/test/asan/TestCases/Linux/leak_check_segv.cpp:4 // REQUIRES: leak-detection -#include <stdlib.h> +#include <sanitizer/lsan_interface.h> #include <stdio.h> ---------------- xen0n wrote: > Why unnecessarily reorder things, especially putting this //in front of// the > standard library includes? > Why unnecessarily reorder things, especially putting this //in front of// the > standard library includes? An automatic adjustment of the format. ================ Comment at: compiler-rt/test/asan/TestCases/Linux/leak_check_segv.cpp:20-21 + 16 * 1024, PROT_NONE); + mprotect((void *)(((unsigned long)data + kPageSize - 1) & ~(kPageSize - 1)), + 16 * 1024, PROT_NONE); __lsan_do_leak_check(); ---------------- xen0n wrote: > Might be better to split this part of change out of the LoongArch enablement > patch after all... > Might be better to split this part of change out of the LoongArch enablement > patch after all... OK. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139686/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139686 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
