[cfe-commits] please review: adding module-level metadata for ThreadSanitizer

[Kostya Serebryany]

Bill,

Did you continue this discussion recently?
Any suggestions?

Thanks,

--kcc

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:

> "Encoding Compile Flags into the IR"?
> Yes, that's the same problem.
> Great! I can wait.
>
> --kcc
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at apple.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 22, 2012, at 12:20 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I'd like to resurrect an old discussion: how to selectively disable
>> ThreadSanitizer (or AddressSanitizer, etc) instrumentation
>> > for particular functions.
>> > For AddressSanitizer we currently use a function attribute
>> "AddressSafety" (if it is not set, instrumentation does not happen),
>> > but Chris doesn't like this idea (attributes are a scarce resource) and
>> he suggested to use module-level metadata instead of an attribute.
>> >
>> > The attached clang patch adds such metadata node for all functions when
>> -fthread-sanitizer is given.
>> > If that is what we want, I'll gradually change AddressSanitizer to use
>> similar approach and will kill the "AddressSafety" attribute.
>> >
>> > BTW, the code looks like this:
>> >   llvm::Value *Fn[] = { F }; ...
>> >   llvm::MDNode::get(VMContext, Fn);
>> > Do we want this code to look like
>> >   llvm::MDNode::get(VMContext, F);
>> > (i.e. to add more llvm::MDNode::get() methods)?
>>
>> Bill has been working on something similar for command line options and
>> LTO. There's still been some chatting about it, but Bill's planning on
>> updating the list in the next few days with what's going on if waiting a
>> bit is ok?
>>
>> -eric
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20120905/3ed941dd/attachment.html>