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: > tangyouling wrote: > > 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"? > "at present"; if you plan to revisit this later for properly supporting > variable VM layouts, omitting the justification is fine to me. Support for variable VM layout has not been planned for some time. ================ 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: > tangyouling wrote: > > 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. > So you mean you're actually unable to avoid this diff damage? I will try to avoid this unnecessary auto-formatting. 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
