Okay, I will keep it as a separate file then. It's very likely that I will soon send a follow up, as there's another very similar case known to not work properly (based on the experience with UBSan Vptr bot in Chromium)
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Ivan Krasin <kra...@google.com> wrote: > >> Thank you, Richard. >> >> Shall I merge the newly introduced test/CodeGenCXX/ubsan-vtable-checks.cpp >> into catch-undef-behavior.cpp or it's more clear when it's standalone? >> > > Up to you. catch-undef-behavior.cpp is getting unwieldy, so a separate > test file doesn't seem like a bad thing. > > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Richard Smith <rich...@metafoo.co.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Ivan Krasin via cfe-commits < >>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>>> krasin added a comment. >>>> >>>> Small correction: all UBSan type checks tests live in compiler-rt. >>> >>> >>> Actually, most of the UBSan tests live in >>> test/CodeGenCXX/catch-undef-behavior.cpp >>> in Clang; the compiler-rt tests are merely aiming to test that the runtime >>> produces the correct diagnostics. There are a few more test files testing >>> UBSan besides that one; you can find the tests by grepping for "fsanitize=" >>> in Clang's test/ directory. >>> >>> >>>> There is a test for UBsan + devirtualization inside tools/clang. My >>>> point still stands. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D26559 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> cfe-commits mailing list >>>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org >>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >>>> >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
