On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 01:44:27PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> I am somewhat lost in this thread and probably missing something. >> But why do we need __asan_load (which is not noabort) at all? Outline >> instrumentation is non a default mode for both user-space asan and >> kasan (at least in the envisioned future). I would expect that these >> non-typical cases that use outline instrumentation can also bear the >> overhead of non-noreturn functions. Can we use just one version of >> __asan_load and let runtime decide on abort? > > __asan_load actually must never be noreturn, because in the common > case where the load is valid it of course returns.
Right! Then I am puzzled by that message by Yury: "I'd still suggest to emit __asan_load_noabort so that we match userspace (where __asan_load strictly matches __asan_report in terminating the program)" Why are we discussing __asan_load_noabort?
