On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 01:32:42PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/05/15 09:58, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 04:47:06PM -0800, Alexey Samsonov wrote:
> >>Right, -fsanitize=all produces an error, while -fsanitize-recover=all
> >>enables recovery for all
> >>sanitizers, -fno-sanitize-recover=all disables recovery for everything.
> >
> >Ok, here is a GCC patch for that.
> >-fno-sanitize=all is supported as a way to turn off all the sanitizers,
> >-f{,no-}sanitize-recover=all is supported too, and one can mix all
> >with other sanitizer names.
> >
> >Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
> >
> >2015-01-05 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
> >
> > * opts.c (common_handle_option): Add support for
> > -fno-sanitize=all and -f{,no-}sanitize-recover=all.
> >
> > * c-c++-common/asan/sanitize-all-1.c: New test.
> > * c-c++-common/ubsan/sanitize-all-1.c: New test.
> > * c-c++-common/ubsan/sanitize-all-2.c: New test.
> > * c-c++-common/ubsan/sanitize-all-3.c: New test.
> > * c-c++-common/ubsan/sanitize-all-4.c: New test.
> Are there any doc updates that need to happen as a result of this patch?
> Patch itself is fine for the trunk, just want to make sure the doc side is
> good too.
You're right, I'll add documentation tomorrow and repost the patch.
Jakub
