On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Wei Mi <w...@google.com> wrote: > I cannot remove RejectNegative and use -fno-sanitize=address, or else > I will break an assertion (opts-common.c:614). The assertion requires > -fxxx=var options set RejectNegative if var is of enumerater type. I > see that all the other -fxxx=xxx options in common.opt set > RejectNegative. > > Is it ok for me to checkin the current patch and submit another patch > if there is a better way to do it?
I would prefer to have the current patch earlier, rather then a more comprehensive patch later. Otherwise we may end up with too many uses of the old flag. > > Thanks, > Wei. > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Xinliang David Li <davi...@google.com> > wrote: >> Questions: are -fsanitize=thread -fsanitize=address mutually exclusive >> here? If yes, that will be wrong. >> >> How about -fsanitize=all option? >> >> As kcc mentioned, the -fno-.. form is not handled. >> >> David >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Wei Mi <w...@google.com> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> This patch is to change -faddress-sanitizer to -fsanitize=address. Ok for >>> trunk? >>> >>> 2012-11-19 Wei Mi <w...@google.com> >>> >>> * cfgexpand.c (partition_stack_vars): Change flag_asan to >>> flag_sanitize. >>> (expand_stack_vars): Likewise. >>> (defer_stack_allocation): Likewise. >>> (expand_used_vars): Likewise. >>> * varasm.c (assemble_noswitch_variable): Likewise. >>> (assemble_variable): Likewise. >>> (place_block_symbol): Likewise. >>> * asan.c (gate_asan): Likewise. >>> (gate_asan_O0): Likewise. >>> * toplev.c (compile_file): Likewise. >>> (process_options): Likewise. >>> * common.opt: Change faddress-sanitizer to fsanitize=address. >>> * gcc.c (LINK_COMMAND_SPEC): Likewise. >>> * testsuite/lib/asan-dg.exp >>> (check_effective_target_faddress_sanitizer): Likewise. >>> (asan_init): Likewise. >>> * flag-types.h (sanitize_type): New enum type. >>> * doc/invoke.texi (-fsanitize=[address|thread]): Document. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Wei.
