On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Richard Henderson <r...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 12/12/2012 11:50 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> 2012-12-12 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> >> >> PR sanitizer/55508 >> * builtin-attrs.def (ATTR_TMPURE_NOTHROW_LEAF_LIST, >> ATTR_TMPURE_NORETURN_NOTHROW_LEAF_LIST): New. >> * asan.c (ATTR_TMPURE_NOTHROW_LEAF_LIST, >> ATTR_TMPURE_NORETURN_NOTHROW_LEAF_LIST): Define. >> * sanitizer.def: Make __asan_report_* and __asan_handle_no_return >> builtins tm pure. > > Ok. > > Agreed about we need another solution for tsan + tm.
What type of bugs do you expect tsan catch in transactional setting? Are we talking about data races between transactional and non-transactional code? Does atomic transactions permitted by gcc? I mean can I use mutexes and atomics inside of transactions to synchronize with non-transactional code?
