https://github.com/steakhal requested changes to this pull request.
Looks pretty good! However, for this to land, we need to try harder to prevent state-splits. We must prove in more cases (at least in simple symbolic cases) that no overflow can happen. But in principle, I like that we do a split - as the user expects this to overflow sometimes - given the use of the builtin. Speaking of that, do we even propagate taint across such builtin calls? I think it would make sense to taint the result if any of the inputs are tainted. I'd expect such builtins used around user inputs, and critical code - so probably it worth propagating taint. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102602 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
