On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:39:54 PST (-0800), jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
> Have these changes been sent upstream? Although at the present
> development stage applying selected changes might be better than a bulk
> merge from upstream libsanitizer, they should still go upstream so they
> aren't a l
On 12 January 2017 03:30:36 CET, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>--- a/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc
>+++ b/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc
>@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ namespace __sanitizer {
>
>#if !defined(__powerpc64__) && !defined(__x86_64__)
Have these changes been sent upstream? Although at the present
development stage applying selected changes might be better than a bulk
merge from upstream libsanitizer, they should still go upstream so they
aren't a local patch at the time of the next merge.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesour
---
libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_linux.cc | 5 +
libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform.h | 4 ++--
libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc | 2 +-
libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.h | 7 +
