pirama-arumuga-nainar wrote:
FYI, this PR causes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/105569.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
skc7 wrote:
> > > > I remain concerned that newly developed instrumentations may require
> > > > this special property. Is it useful to restrict this to HIP programs,
> > > > at least before we gain more experience to comfortably apply this to
> > > > other configurations?
> > > > I'm also wor
MaskRay wrote:
> > > I remain concerned that newly developed instrumentations may require this
> > > special property. Is it useful to restrict this to HIP programs, at least
> > > before we gain more experience to comfortably apply this to other
> > > configurations?
> > > I'm also worried th
JonChesterfield wrote:
Sanizer passes setting a "no sanitizer" magic variable is backwards.
If this behaviour is the way to go, have clang set a "needs_asan_lowering" or
whatever and have the corresponding pass remove it.
It shouldn't be necessary to emit ever increasing lists of pass and targ
https://github.com/skc7 closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/skc7 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -12,12 +12,47 @@
//===--===//
#include "llvm/Transforms/Instrumentation.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticInfo.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticPrinter.h"
#include "llvm/IR/IntrinsicInst.h"
#include "llvm/I
https://github.com/skc7 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
>From b7c0520ab9ea9d00fe5008717d2af04d494942eb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: skc7
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:49:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] [Sanitizer] Make sanitizer passes idempotent.
---
clang/test/CodeGenObjC/no-
MaskRay wrote:
> > I remain concerned that newly developed instrumentations may require this
> > special property. Is it useful to restrict this to HIP programs, at least
> > before we gain more experience to comfortably apply this to other
> > configurations?
> > I'm also worried that this ch
b-sumner wrote:
Also
> I remain concerned that newly developed instrumentations may require this
> special property. Is it useful to restrict this to HIP programs, at least
> before we gain more experience to comfortably apply this to other
> configurations?
>
> I'm also worried that this c
vitalybuka wrote:
> I remain concerned that newly developed instrumentations may require this
> special property. Is it useful to restrict this to HIP programs, at least
> before we gain more experience to comfortably apply this to other
> configurations?
>
> I'm also worried that this change
MaskRay wrote:
I am still nervous as newer instrumentations might all need to know about the
special property.
Is it useful to restrict this to HIP programs, at least before we gain more
experience to comfortably apply this to other configurations?
I do worry that such a change will cause us n
https://github.com/vitalybuka approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -12,12 +12,47 @@
//===--===//
#include "llvm/Transforms/Instrumentation.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticInfo.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticPrinter.h"
#include "llvm/IR/IntrinsicInst.h"
#include "llvm/I
vitalybuka wrote:
I will take another look tomorrow.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
vitalybuka wrote:
> > @vitalybuka @nikic Let me know if anything needs to be changed in this PR?
> > Else, will merge the PR after approval.
>
> Please review.
you should click "re-request review" button next to review.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
_
skc7 wrote:
> @vitalybuka @nikic Let me know if anything needs to be changed in this PR?
> Else, will merge the PR after approval.
Please review.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/skc7 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
>From 3c7c677b7d6dc3934fddc452021dcc2c06086606 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: skc7
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:49:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] [Sanitizer] Make sanitizer passes idempotent.
---
clang/test/CodeGenObjC/no-
skc7 wrote:
@vitalybuka @nikic Let me know if anything needs to be changed in this PR?
Else, will merge the PR after approval.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.o
@@ -12,12 +12,33 @@
//===--===//
#include "llvm/Transforms/Instrumentation.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticInfo.h"
#include "llvm/IR/IntrinsicInst.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Module.h"
#include "llvm/TargetParser
https://github.com/skc7 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
>From 2bcca883eae902238cb49d44ed24aa1304364646 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: skc7
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:49:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [Sanitizer] Make sanitizer passes idempotent.
---
clang/test/CodeGenObjC
@@ -12,12 +12,33 @@
//===--===//
#include "llvm/Transforms/Instrumentation.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticInfo.h"
#include "llvm/IR/IntrinsicInst.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Module.h"
#include "llvm/TargetParser
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "llvm/IR/Function.h"
#include "llvm/IR/IRBuilder.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Instruction.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/Module.h"
nikic wrote:
Should be a forward-declare.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
@@ -12,12 +12,33 @@
//===--===//
#include "llvm/Transforms/Instrumentation.h"
+#include "llvm/IR/DiagnosticInfo.h"
#include "llvm/IR/IntrinsicInst.h"
#include "llvm/IR/Module.h"
#include "llvm/TargetParser
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/nikic commented:
Some nits, no strong opinion on overall approach.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/skc7 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
>From 2bcca883eae902238cb49d44ed24aa1304364646 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: skc7
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:49:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Sanitizer] Make sanitizer passes idempotent.
---
clang/test/CodeGenObjC
https://github.com/skc7 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
>From 2bcca883eae902238cb49d44ed24aa1304364646 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: skc7
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:49:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] [Sanitizer] Make sanitizer passes idempotent.
---
clang/test/CodeGenObjC/no-
vitalybuka wrote:
> > @MaskRay can you talk more about your concerns? This won't affect compile
> > time, and instrumenting a shadow load will cause an immediate crash of the
> > application at runtime. This patch seems much more robust than counting on
> > toolchains to always arrange to avoi
vitalybuka wrote:
> In the worse case we need this, I'd hope that this is target-specific.
What does this mean?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
MaskRay wrote:
> @MaskRay can you talk more about your concerns? This won't affect compile
> time, and instrumenting a shadow load will cause an immediate crash of the
> application at runtime. This patch seems much more robust than counting on
> toolchains to always arrange to avoid double in
b-sumner wrote:
@MaskRay can you talk more about your concerns? This won't affect compile
time, and instrumenting a shadow load will cause an immediate crash of the
application at runtime. This seems much more robust than counting on
toolchains to always arrange to avoid double instrumentati
MaskRay wrote:
In the worse case we need this, I'd hope that this is target-specific.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
MaskRay wrote:
> all previous proposals to add such "re-run" protection ended up with "the
> pipeline is wrong". But implementation is so trivial, so I don't mind just to
> have it implemented.
While the implementation is trivial, I also share the concern whether
sanitizers should do this. Th
b-sumner wrote:
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/vitalybuka approved this pull request.
LGTM, but please git some time others to respond
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
vitalybuka wrote:
> > ThreadSanitizer is missing
>
> Have added the flag for tsan-module, But not sure about tsan, which is
> function pass. How do we make that idempotent?
We merged Module and function passes for other sanitizers, and we should do for
tsan as well.
So implementing for module
https://github.com/skc7 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99439
>From 8a2a63ba5e2005fb2bf03b24610dc0e19130a978 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: skc7
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:49:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] [ASAN] Make asan pass idempotent.
---
.../Instrumentation/AddressSanitiz
38 matches
Mail list logo
