@@ -6418,6 +6418,12 @@ def warn_signed_bitfield_enum_conversion : Warning<
InGroup, DefaultIgnore;
def note_change_bitfield_sign : Note<
"consider making the bitfield type %select{unsigned|signed}0">;
+def warn_ms_bitfield_mismatched_storage_packing : Warning<
+ "bit-field
@@ -12182,10 +12182,14 @@ QualType Sema::BuildStdInitializerList(QualType
Element, SourceLocation Loc) {
Args.addArgument(TemplateArgumentLoc(TemplateArgument(Element),
Context.getTrivialTypeSourceInfo(Element,
@@ -3134,6 +3134,31 @@ bool Type::isStdByteType() const {
return false;
}
+bool Type::isDestroyingDeleteT() const {
+ auto *RD = getAsCXXRecordDecl();
+ return RD && RD->isInStdNamespace() && RD->getIdentifier() &&
+ RD->getIdentifier()->isStr("destroying_delete_t"
@@ -10601,19 +10608,28 @@ static bool AnalyzeBitFieldAssignment(Sema &S,
FieldDecl *Bitfield, Expr *Init,
// on Windows where unfixed enums always use an underlying type of 'int'.
unsigned DiagID = 0;
if (SignedEnum && !SignedBitfield) {
-DiagID = dia
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
>From 1607a76c4fd2bd7f0c4e834d2935668d51daf55f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 00:47:18 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add builtin_get_vtable_pointer and
virtual_member_address
ojhunt wrote:
@Sterling-Augustine thank you!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135686
>From 62be33b3aa475a33d1c11679ed069eb2af981754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 15:02:46 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [Clang]Ensure correct handling of access control in P2719
diagnost
ojhunt wrote:
> Thanks for the quick fix
it's so very very stupid :O
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135686
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
I have a very immediate fix, but I'd rather a slightly nicer one - at some
point refactoring exposed a problem in access control diagnostics, in a way
that is very very weird and implies something else broken in the existing tree
as well.
If I can't work out the correct systemic
ojhunt wrote:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135686
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@Sterling-Augustine sorry I was waiting for all the bots to pass
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135686
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135686
>From 62be33b3aa475a33d1c11679ed069eb2af981754 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 15:02:46 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [Clang]Ensure correct handling of access control in P2719
diagnost
ojhunt wrote:
Waiting on review for https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136515
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136515
After landing #116760 we hit build failures due to existing fields storing
FPEvalMethodKind not being wide enough.
>From 535e11400ea11461fa8e0cc98f9b481b045805c4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date:
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136515
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
This is a blind build fix, so I'll merge
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136515
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136204
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64e-apple-ios -fptrauth-calls -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes
CHECK,CHECK-AUTH
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64-apple-ios -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136204
The existing test behavior checked for a warning being emitted under an #if,
but if the feature detection fails the #if fails and the warning is not
expected in the output.
I've made the test more explicit, and
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137580
>From 0129e28643f667febb23dba1521134a6151c2f7d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2025 22:33:44 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Add `__ptrauth_restricted_intptr` qualifier
__ptrauth_rest
ojhunt wrote:
Thanks!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137474
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137474
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137247
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@zahiraam it's currently causing a warning (@Endilll asking for an update is
why I ended up looking at this on my phone)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137247
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lis
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
Remove FEM_Indeterminable as it is unused and cannot be stored safely in an
unsigned bitfield
>From a33b76cb769b8669922101c9cb7b9fbb28cbb1fe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 13:
ojhunt wrote:
@Endilll this is the fix for the warning you're seeing
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
(Recreating after mismerge)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
Hmmm, I thought it had been?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137247
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
I've reverted, not sure why I thought it had been reviewed?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137247
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137654
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#137247
>From 8da1b21e8c45980741fc6f5d8f290ac9ac80d878 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:50:35 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "[clang] Remove FEM_Indete
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137654
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@zahiraam we started diagnosing size/type mismatch of bitfields vs
preferred_type in, which exposed that FPEvalMethodKind based options can't
store FEM_Indeterminable https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
ojhunt wrote:
@zahiraam @AaronBallman a different option would be to add a signed vs unsigned
storage option to the `OPTION` and `BENIGN_ENUM_LANGOPT` macros so we can store
negative enumerations safely
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
__
https://github.com/ojhunt approved this pull request.
Good catch, we'll need to add cases to the test when pushing
__ptrauth_restricted_intptr
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137474
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
ht
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136783
When records contain fields with pointer authentication, even simple copies can
require
additional work be performed. This patch contains the core functionality
required to
handle user defined structs, as well a
@@ -2801,6 +2801,10 @@ static bool isTriviallyCopyableTypeImpl(const QualType
&type,
if (type.hasNonTrivialObjCLifetime())
return false;
+ QualType::PrimitiveCopyKind PCK = type.isNonTrivialToPrimitiveCopy();
+ if (PCK != QualType::PCK_Trivial && PCK != QualType::PCK_
@@ -103,3 +103,46 @@ static_assert(_Generic(typeof(overload_func(&ptr0)), int :
1, default : 0));
static_assert(_Generic(typeof(overload_func(&valid0)), float : 1, default :
0));
void func(int array[__ptrauth(VALID_DATA_KEY) 10]); // expected-error
{{'__ptrauth' qualifier o
ojhunt wrote:
> This change makes Clang produce warnings when building Clang itself; warnings
> looking like this:
>
That was the entire point of this warning. As far as I know clang+llvm is the
only project to use preferred_type (instead of just using enum typed
bitfields), but as a result
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136783
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
ojhunt wrote:
@cor3ntin the option selection down stream is a StringSwitch on the
authentication mode, and then a sequence of (not large, I think just two) `if
(option == constant)` checks to set up specific options.
Previous PRs have suggested maps, etc for such conditions, and a map of
opti
@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
ojhunt wrote:
@zahiraam none of these actually try to set FEM_Indeterminate, so far I cannot
find any way to make clang ever set that state and I can’t find a way for
source code to do so either - it looks like in the past the fpcontrol pragma
could induce it, but none of the examples still do
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From b3de41c15edc527154e461e5b0df61642599b45e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 01:43:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptraut
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From 21dc6e5a5c9762292bc135c62c6b442dc18908b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:26:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptrauth
T
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From f5b7cf409e3518f79ac6fce5d01876a51ae6f4e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:26:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptrauth
T
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From d32a1bd141a668a2d8e8c6315a38506c7e1be4c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 22:26:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptrauth
T
ojhunt wrote:
Yeah, clang-15 seems to be the only time we would ever produce -1:
https://godbolt.org/z/7M61eff4f
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113510
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@AaronBallman do you have any further requests or changes for this PR?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100830
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@AaronBallman are you ok with this now? I'm re-requesting the review as it's
been a while, and I want to confirm I addressed things as you wanted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117428
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@l
ojhunt wrote:
> > I just noticed there's no documentation for
> > `__builtin_virtual_member_address()` so I'm addressing that.
> > Due to code drift and time I realized that they disagree as to whether they
> > should take `C*` or `C&` so I'm going to make them both accept either
> > (existing
ojhunt wrote:
> > I just noticed there's no documentation for
> > `__builtin_virtual_member_address()` so I'm addressing that.
> > Due to code drift and time I realized that they disagree as to whether they
> > should take `C*` or `C&` so I'm going to make them both accept either
> > (existing
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135562
If clang is configured to apply pointer authentication to type_info's vtable
pointer we
ensure that the selected schema is applied to the RTTI objects generated for
objc++.
>From 5dc1e5fbb57f88e412e044605d8fe30
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked down a new and spurious "This variable is used uninitialized"
> to this PR. I'm working on a reduced test case now. It looks like this:
>
> ```
> .cpp:XXX+2:13: error: variable 'new_section' is uninitialized when
> used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
> 572 |
ojhunt wrote:
> I'm confused -- how is there existing code depending on a builtin which
> doesn't yet exist in Clang? Are we copying these builtins from somewhere else?
This is part of the pointer authentication support we are upstreaming, all of
which has been in use for a long time, just not
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked down a new and spurious "This variable is used uninitialized"
> to this PR. I'm working on a reduced test case now. It looks like this:
>
> ```
> .cpp:XXX+2:13: error: variable 'new_section' is uninitialized when
> used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
> 572 |
https://github.com/ojhunt edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116785
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135469
These are a pair of builtins to support particularly weird edge case operations
while correctly handling the non-trivial implicit pointer authentication
schemas applied to polymorphic members.
>From 6e1d13805da
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64e-apple-ios -fptrauth-calls -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefixes
CHECK,CHECK-AUTH
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm64-apple-ios -emit-llvm
-no-enable-noundef-analysis -o - %s | FileCheck %
ojhunt wrote:
I just noticed there's no documentation for
`__builtin_virtual_member_address()` so I'm addressing that.
Due to code drift and time I realized that they disagree as to whether they
should take `C*` or `C&` so I'm going to make them both accept either (existing
code means we can'
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138482
This adds a number of builtins to query the ptrauth schema of an arbitrary type
in a way that can be fed into other ptrauth qualifiers.
>From e84310f8a57a3f9b75dfc7260137e984d7f55f87 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Fro
ojhunt wrote:
Adding @cor3ntin and @AaronBallman in case they have a better idea for getting
the function key to Sema than having it duplicated in langopts and codegen
options
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138482
___
cfe-commits mailing l
ojhunt wrote:
Also the associated tests do not pass yet as they're blocked on
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828 and other ptrauth PRs
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138482
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.o
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
>From b12d78087c521d61f3e078d5a0d79889b17fbde9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 16:17:15 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Ensure type aware allocators handle transparent
decl co
ojhunt wrote:
> Can you add tests? Thanks
sigh, I thought I had :D please hold
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
@AaronBallman @zahiraam given we do not support FEM_Indeterminate, and there
appears to be no way to actually get clang into the state anyway, I think that
the correct thing to do is to remove it and work out had to get this to
cooperate with the OPTION macro if we ever do add s
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From b3de41c15edc527154e461e5b0df61642599b45e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 01:43:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptraut
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
>From a52df39baea119a5a7b13dd8d98dd145522f6293 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 13:30:40 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Remove FEM_Indeterminable
Remove FEM_Indeterminable as
ojhunt wrote:
Two of the fixes were to code that was removed while resolving the merge
conflict on the LANG_OPT declaration, I thought with the revert of c2a62af I
got all the changes but I'll recheck
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
ojhunt wrote:
Just waiting on a build (force push was due to me hopelessly screwing up my
tree)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cf
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137661
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ojhunt wrote:
> @ojhunt In #137600 there are a list of a few temporary PRs that were merged
> in to silence the warning. These need to be reverted after this one gets
> merged in. Do you want to revert them or you want me to do that?
I removed them as part of resolving the merge conflict, and
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138341
When merging the fix for FEM_Indeterminate I reverted the follow on warning
fixes, but misread this diff and retained the explicitly defaulted constructor.
>From f8a05ddf95c4efa963411694f49fa235e59c3d5c Mon Sep
ojhunt wrote:
@zahiraam missed this while reverting :-O
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138341
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138341
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -8374,20 +8376,212 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138616
We were testing the immediate DeclContext for found new and delete operators,
which is incorrect if the declarations are contained by a transparent decl as
can be induced with extern or export statements.
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
This PR adds support for an 'options' parameter for the __ptrauth qualifier.
The initial version only exposes the authehntication modes:
* "strip"
* "sign-and-strip"
* "sign-and-auth"
There are other options
ojhunt wrote:
The tests in this PR are dependent on #136828, and the included tests have
non-sequential numbers as the tests include other options that are not
supported by this PR, to try and limit the complexity of this PR to just the
parsing and existing functionality.
https://github.com/l
@@ -8374,20 +8376,191 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
@@ -8374,20 +8376,191 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
@@ -8374,20 +8376,191 @@ static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx,
QualType &T,
IsInvalid |= !S.checkPointerAuthDiscriminatorArg(
ExtraDiscriminatorArg, Sema::PADAK_ExtraDiscPtrAuth, ExtraDiscriminator);
- if (IsInvalid) {
-Attr.setInvalid();
-retur
ojhunt wrote:
This PR is a draft as it will need to be updated to merged correctly, and
verify test output (conflicts, unintentional mismatches coming from splitting
out the PR) after #136828
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
___
cfe-c
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136828
>From b3de41c15edc527154e461e5b0df61642599b45e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 01:43:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang][ptrauth] add support for options parameter to
__ptraut
@@ -8350,14 +8350,16 @@ static void HandleNeonVectorTypeAttr(QualType &CurType,
const ParsedAttr &Attr,
/// Handle the __ptrauth qualifier.
static void HandlePtrAuthQualifier(ASTContext &Ctx, QualType &T,
const ParsedAttr &Attr, Sema &S) {
-
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked two more issues to this commit. Both only manifest when using
> Clang header modules, which likely means that AST serialization is somehow
> incorrect after this patch. I'm reducing one of the test cases now, but it's
> taking a lot of time. In the meantime, ple
ojhunt wrote:
> We have tracked two more issues to this commit. Both only manifest when using
> Clang header modules, which likely means that AST serialization is somehow
> incorrect after this patch. I'm reducing one of the test cases now, but it's
> taking a lot of time. In the meantime, ple
https://github.com/ojhunt ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ojhunt updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
>From dec6509a54940fdda77577c9d07e1c061701ab75 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hunt
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 18:09:22 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [clang][p2719] Module deserialization does not restore
allocator f
ojhunt wrote:
Ok, added PCH and module tests - verified both tests fail without this fix to
the serialization, and they pass now.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.ll
ojhunt wrote:
@alexfh yeah I think I found the issue, would you mind trying
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102 ? (need to work on tests but
wanted you to be able to test quickly - I'm currently waiting on a fresh build
alas so the PR is currently done blind)
https://github.com/l
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137102
When serializing and deserializing a FunctionDecl we don't recover whether or
not the decl was a type aware allocator or destroying delete, because in the
final PR that information was placed in a side table in
ojhunt wrote:
> Do we need to do anything special for constant expression handling?
I do not believe so as pointer auth does not occur during consteval, but I'll
see if we have any additional existing tests that I haven't included here. If
not I'll add some new ones:
- [ ] Type checking (e.g.
https://github.com/ojhunt edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136783
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -2801,6 +2801,10 @@ static bool isTriviallyCopyableTypeImpl(const QualType
&type,
if (type.hasNonTrivialObjCLifetime())
return false;
+ QualType::PrimitiveCopyKind PCK = type.isNonTrivialToPrimitiveCopy();
+ if (PCK != QualType::PCK_Trivial && PCK != QualType::PCK_
ojhunt wrote:
> Oof. On the one hand, we don't want to break your existing users. On the
> other hand, we don't want to force the much broader audience of users into a
> worse interface. Are those uses in your downstream able to use things like
> fix-its to switch from the reference-based inte
201 - 300 of 363 matches
Mail list logo
