<div dir="ltr">Thank you for help.<div><br></div><div>Now I see that sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap is green. If it indeed was repaired by <span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">r213178, it could mean that sanitizer issues false warnings for 1-byte blocks, as the only effect of that change is prevention of allocating tiny blocks.</span></div>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div>Thanks,<br>--Serge<br></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2014-07-17 3:15 GMT+07:00 Evgeniy Stepanov <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eugeni.stepanov@gmail.com" target="_blank">eugeni.stepanov@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
About right, but for MemorySanitizer you need to link target binaries<br>
with instrumented libstdc++/libc++. And it does not detect leaks<br>
anyway, ASan does.<br>
<br>
So, -DLLVM_USE_SANITIZER=Address should do it.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Serge Pavlov <<a href="mailto:sepavloff@gmail.com">sepavloff@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi Evgeniy,<br>
><br>
> There is nothing in r213120, that could cause memory leaks in<br>
> NestedNameSpecifierLocBuilder, maybe this change triggered existing problem.<br>
> Sanitizer reports leaks of tiny blocks (1 byte), in r213178 such blocks<br>
> should not be created. However I am not sure if this can help.<br>
><br>
> By the way, how I can build compiler with sanitizer enabled? When I create<br>
> build using command:<br>
><br>
> cmake \<br>
> -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release \<br>
> -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=ON \<br>
> -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=$CLANGPATH/clang \<br>
> -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER=$CLANGPATH/clang++ \<br>
> -DLLVM_USE_SANITIZER=Memory \<br>
> -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=X86 \<br>
> ../llvm<br>
><br>
> make fails:<br>
><br>
> [ 6%] Building Intrinsics.gen...<br>
> ==25305== WARNING: MemorySanitizer: use-of-uninitialized-value<br>
> #0 0x7fb534d9dedd in _M_dispose<br>
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.8.2/../../../../include/c++/4.8.2/bits/basic_string.h:240:34<br>
> ...<br>
><br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
> --Serge<br>
><br>
><br>
> 2014-07-16 19:50 GMT+07:00 Evgeniy Stepanov <<a href="mailto:eugeni.stepanov@gmail.com">eugeni.stepanov@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> is looks like there are new memory leaks from this change:<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/builds/3963/steps/check-clang%20asan/logs/stdio" target="_blank">http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/builds/3963/steps/check-clang%20asan/logs/stdio</a><br>
>><br>
>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Serge Pavlov <<a href="mailto:sepavloff@gmail.com">sepavloff@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > Author: sepavloff<br>
>> > Date: Wed Jul 16 00:16:52 2014<br>
>> > New Revision: 213120<br>
>> ><br>
>> > URL: <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=213120&view=rev" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=213120&view=rev</a><br>
>> > Log:<br>
>> > Improve error recovery around colon.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Recognize additional cases, when '::' is mistyped as ':'.<br>
>> > This is a fix to RP18587 - colons have too much protection in<br>
>> > member-declarations<br>
>> > Review is tracked by <a href="http://reviews.llvm.org/D3653" target="_blank">http://reviews.llvm.org/D3653</a>.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > This is an attempt to recommit the fix, initially committed as r212957<br>
>> > but then<br>
>> > reverted in r212965 as it broke self-build. In the updated patch<br>
>> > ParseDirectDeclarator<br>
>> > turns on colon protection in for context as well.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Modified:<br>
>> > cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp<br>
>> > cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp<br>
>> > cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/enum-bitfield.cpp<br>
>> > cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/for-range-examples.cpp<br>
>> > cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/nested-name-spec.cpp<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp<br>
>> > URL:<br>
>> > <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > ==============================================================================<br>
>> > --- cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp (original)<br>
>> > +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDecl.cpp Wed Jul 16 00:16:52 2014<br>
>> > @@ -2715,24 +2715,23 @@ void Parser::ParseDeclarationSpecifiers(<br>
>> > // typedef-name<br>
>> > case tok::kw_decltype:<br>
>> > case tok::identifier: {<br>
>> > + // This identifier can only be a typedef name if we haven't<br>
>> > already seen<br>
>> > + // a type-specifier. Without this check we misparse:<br>
>> > + // typedef int X; struct Y { short X; }; as 'short int'.<br>
>> > + if (DS.hasTypeSpecifier())<br>
>> > + goto DoneWithDeclSpec;<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > // In C++, check to see if this is a scope specifier like<br>
>> > foo::bar::, if<br>
>> > // so handle it as such. This is important for ctor parsing.<br>
>> > if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus) {<br>
>> > if (TryAnnotateCXXScopeToken(EnteringContext)) {<br>
>> > - if (!DS.hasTypeSpecifier())<br>
>> > - DS.SetTypeSpecError();<br>
>> > + DS.SetTypeSpecError();<br>
>> > goto DoneWithDeclSpec;<br>
>> > }<br>
>> > if (!Tok.is(tok::identifier))<br>
>> > continue;<br>
>> > }<br>
>> ><br>
>> > - // This identifier can only be a typedef name if we haven't<br>
>> > already seen<br>
>> > - // a type-specifier. Without this check we misparse:<br>
>> > - // typedef int X; struct Y { short X; }; as 'short int'.<br>
>> > - if (DS.hasTypeSpecifier())<br>
>> > - goto DoneWithDeclSpec;<br>
>> > -<br>
>> > // Check for need to substitute AltiVec keyword tokens.<br>
>> > if (TryAltiVecToken(DS, Loc, PrevSpec, DiagID, isInvalid))<br>
>> > break;<br>
>> > @@ -4529,7 +4528,9 @@ void Parser::ParseDeclaratorInternal(Dec<br>
>> > // Member pointers get special handling, since there's no place for<br>
>> > the<br>
>> > // scope spec in the generic path below.<br>
>> > if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus &&<br>
>> > - (Tok.is(tok::coloncolon) || Tok.is(tok::identifier) ||<br>
>> > + (Tok.is(tok::coloncolon) ||<br>
>> > + (Tok.is(tok::identifier) &&<br>
>> > + (NextToken().is(tok::coloncolon) || NextToken().is(tok::less)))<br>
>> > ||<br>
>> > Tok.is(tok::annot_cxxscope))) {<br>
>> > bool EnteringContext = D.getContext() == Declarator::FileContext ||<br>
>> > D.getContext() == Declarator::MemberContext;<br>
>> > @@ -4722,6 +4723,14 @@ void Parser::ParseDirectDeclarator(Decla<br>
>> > DeclaratorScopeObj DeclScopeObj(*this, D.getCXXScopeSpec());<br>
>> ><br>
>> > if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus && D.mayHaveIdentifier()) {<br>
>> > + // Don't parse FOO:BAR as if it were a typo for FOO::BAR inside a<br>
>> > class, in<br>
>> > + // this context it is a bitfield. Also in range-based for statement<br>
>> > colon<br>
>> > + // may delimit for-range-declaration.<br>
>> > + ColonProtectionRAIIObject X(*this,<br>
>> > + D.getContext() ==<br>
>> > Declarator::MemberContext ||<br>
>> > + (D.getContext() ==<br>
>> > Declarator::ForContext &&<br>
>> > + getLangOpts().CPlusPlus11));<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > // ParseDeclaratorInternal might already have parsed the scope.<br>
>> > if (D.getCXXScopeSpec().isEmpty()) {<br>
>> > bool EnteringContext = D.getContext() == Declarator::FileContext<br>
>> > ||<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp<br>
>> > URL:<br>
>> > <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > ==============================================================================<br>
>> > --- cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp (original)<br>
>> > +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp Wed Jul 16 00:16:52 2014<br>
>> > @@ -1239,7 +1239,8 @@ void Parser::ParseClassSpecifier(tok::To<br>
>> > // Parse the (optional) nested-name-specifier.<br>
>> > CXXScopeSpec &SS = DS.getTypeSpecScope();<br>
>> > if (getLangOpts().CPlusPlus) {<br>
>> > - // "FOO : BAR" is not a potential typo for "FOO::BAR".<br>
>> > + // "FOO : BAR" is not a potential typo for "FOO::BAR". In this<br>
>> > context it<br>
>> > + // is a base-specifier-list.<br>
>> > ColonProtectionRAIIObject X(*this);<br>
>> ><br>
>> > if (ParseOptionalCXXScopeSpecifier(SS, ParsedType(),<br>
>> > EnteringContext))<br>
>> > @@ -1926,14 +1927,8 @@ void Parser::ParseCXXMemberDeclaratorBef<br>
>> > // declarator pure-specifier[opt]<br>
>> > // declarator brace-or-equal-initializer[opt]<br>
>> > // identifier[opt] ':' constant-expression<br>
>> > - if (Tok.isNot(tok::colon)) {<br>
>> > - // Don't parse FOO:BAR as if it were a typo for FOO::BAR, in this<br>
>> > context it<br>
>> > - // is a bitfield.<br>
>> > - // FIXME: This should only apply when parsing the id-expression<br>
>> > (see<br>
>> > - // PR18587).<br>
>> > - ColonProtectionRAIIObject X(*this);<br>
>> > + if (Tok.isNot(tok::colon))<br>
>> > ParseDeclarator(DeclaratorInfo);<br>
>> > - }<br>
>> ><br>
>> > if (!DeclaratorInfo.isFunctionDeclarator() &&<br>
>> > TryConsumeToken(tok::colon)) {<br>
>> > BitfieldSize = ParseConstantExpression();<br>
>> > @@ -2015,6 +2010,14 @@ void Parser::ParseCXXClassMemberDeclarat<br>
>> > return;<br>
>> > }<br>
>> ><br>
>> > + // Turn on colon protection early, while parsing declspec, although<br>
>> > there is<br>
>> > + // nothing to protect there. It prevents from false errors if error<br>
>> > recovery<br>
>> > + // incorrectly determines where the declspec ends, as in the example:<br>
>> > + // struct A { enum class B { C }; };<br>
>> > + // const int C = 4;<br>
>> > + // struct D { A::B : C; };<br>
>> > + ColonProtectionRAIIObject X(*this);<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > // Access declarations.<br>
>> > bool MalformedTypeSpec = false;<br>
>> > if (!TemplateInfo.Kind &&<br>
>> > @@ -2128,13 +2131,11 @@ void Parser::ParseCXXClassMemberDeclarat<br>
>> > if (MalformedTypeSpec)<br>
>> > DS.SetTypeSpecError();<br>
>> ><br>
>> > - {<br>
>> > - // Don't parse FOO:BAR as if it were a typo for FOO::BAR, in this<br>
>> > context it<br>
>> > - // is a bitfield.<br>
>> > - ColonProtectionRAIIObject X(*this);<br>
>> > - ParseDeclarationSpecifiers(DS, TemplateInfo, AS, DSC_class,<br>
>> > - &CommonLateParsedAttrs);<br>
>> > - }<br>
>> > + ParseDeclarationSpecifiers(DS, TemplateInfo, AS, DSC_class,<br>
>> > + &CommonLateParsedAttrs);<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > + // Turn off colon protection that was set for declspec.<br>
>> > + X.restore();<br>
>> ><br>
>> > // If we had a free-standing type definition with a missing<br>
>> > semicolon, we<br>
>> > // may get this far before the problem becomes obvious.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/enum-bitfield.cpp<br>
>> > URL:<br>
>> > <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/enum-bitfield.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/enum-bitfield.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > ==============================================================================<br>
>> > --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/enum-bitfield.cpp (original)<br>
>> > +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/enum-bitfield.cpp Wed Jul 16 00:16:52 2014<br>
>> > @@ -16,3 +16,15 @@ struct Y {<br>
>> > enum E : int(2);<br>
>> > enum E : Z(); // expected-error{{integral constant expression must<br>
>> > have integral or unscoped enumeration type, not 'Z'}}<br>
>> > };<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +namespace pr18587 {<br>
>> > +struct A {<br>
>> > + enum class B {<br>
>> > + C<br>
>> > + };<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +const int C = 4;<br>
>> > +struct D {<br>
>> > + A::B : C;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +}<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/for-range-examples.cpp<br>
>> > URL:<br>
>> > <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/for-range-examples.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/for-range-examples.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > ==============================================================================<br>
>> > --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/for-range-examples.cpp (original)<br>
>> > +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/for-range-examples.cpp Wed Jul 16 00:16:52<br>
>> > 2014<br>
>> > @@ -227,3 +227,15 @@ namespace test7 {<br>
>> > for (e [[deprecated]] : arr) { e = 0; } // expected-warning<br>
>> > {{deprecated}} expected-note {{here}} expected-warning {{extension}}<br>
>> > }<br>
>> > }<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +namespace pr18587 {<br>
>> > + class Arg {};<br>
>> > + struct Cont {<br>
>> > + int *begin();<br>
>> > + int *end();<br>
>> > + };<br>
>> > + void AddAllArgs(Cont &x) {<br>
>> > + for (auto Arg: x) {<br>
>> > + }<br>
>> > + }<br>
>> > +}<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Modified: cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/nested-name-spec.cpp<br>
>> > URL:<br>
>> > <a href="http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/nested-name-spec.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/nested-name-spec.cpp?rev=213120&r1=213119&r2=213120&view=diff</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > ==============================================================================<br>
>> > --- cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/nested-name-spec.cpp (original)<br>
>> > +++ cfe/trunk/test/SemaCXX/nested-name-spec.cpp Wed Jul 16 00:16:52 2014<br>
>> > @@ -311,3 +311,102 @@ namespace N {<br>
>> ><br>
>> > namespace TypedefNamespace { typedef int F; };<br>
>> > TypedefNamespace::F::NonexistentName BadNNSWithCXXScopeSpec; //<br>
>> > expected-error {{'F' (aka 'int') is not a class, namespace, or scoped<br>
>> > enumeration}}<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +namespace PR18587 {<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +struct C1 {<br>
>> > + int a, b, c;<br>
>> > + typedef int C2;<br>
>> > + struct B1 {<br>
>> > + struct B2 {<br>
>> > + int a, b, c;<br>
>> > + };<br>
>> > + };<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct C2 { static const unsigned N1 = 1; };<br>
>> > +struct B1 {<br>
>> > + enum E1 { B2 = 2 };<br>
>> > + static const int B3 = 3;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +const int N1 = 2;<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +// Function declarators<br>
>> > +struct S1a { int f(C1::C2); };<br>
>> > +struct S1b { int f(C1:C2); }; // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in<br>
>> > nested name specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +struct S2a {<br>
>> > + C1::C2 f(C1::C2);<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S2c {<br>
>> > + C1::C2 f(C1:C2); // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name<br>
>> > specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +struct S3a {<br>
>> > + int f(C1::C2), C2 : N1;<br>
>> > + int g : B1::B2;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S3b {<br>
>> > + int g : B1:B2; // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name<br>
>> > specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +// Inside square brackets<br>
>> > +struct S4a {<br>
>> > + int f[C2::N1];<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S4b {<br>
>> > + int f[C2:N1]; // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name<br>
>> > specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +struct S5a {<br>
>> > + int f(int xx[B1::B3 ? C2::N1 : B1::B2]);<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S5b {<br>
>> > + int f(int xx[B1::B3 ? C2::N1 : B1:B2]); //<br>
>> > expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name specifier; did you mean<br>
>> > '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S5c {<br>
>> > + int f(int xx[B1:B3 ? C2::N1 : B1::B2]); //<br>
>> > expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name specifier; did you mean<br>
>> > '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +// Bit fields<br>
>> > +struct S6a {<br>
>> > + C1::C2 m1 : B1::B2;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S6c {<br>
>> > + C1::C2 m1 : B1:B2; // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name<br>
>> > specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S6d {<br>
>> > + int C2:N1;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S6e {<br>
>> > + static const int N = 3;<br>
>> > + B1::E1 : N;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S6g {<br>
>> > + C1::C2 : B1:B2; // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name<br>
>> > specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > + B1::E1 : B1:B2; // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name<br>
>> > specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +// Template parameters<br>
>> > +template <int N> struct T1 {<br>
>> > + int a,b,c;<br>
>> > + static const unsigned N1 = N;<br>
>> > + typedef unsigned C1;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +T1<C2::N1> var_1a;<br>
>> > +T1<C2:N1> var_1b; // expected-error{{unexpected ':' in nested name<br>
>> > specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +template<int N> int F() {}<br>
>> > +int (*X1)() = (B1::B2 ? F<1> : F<2>);<br>
>> > +int (*X2)() = (B1:B2 ? F<1> : F<2>); // expected-error{{unexpected ':'<br>
>> > in nested name specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +// Bit fields + templates<br>
>> > +struct S7a {<br>
>> > + T1<B1::B2>::C1 m1 : T1<B1::B2>::N1;<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S7b {<br>
>> > + T1<B1:B2>::C1 m1 : T1<B1::B2>::N1; // expected-error{{unexpected ':'<br>
>> > in nested name specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +struct S7c {<br>
>> > + T1<B1::B2>::C1 m1 : T1<B1:B2>::N1; // expected-error{{unexpected ':'<br>
>> > in nested name specifier; did you mean '::'?}}<br>
>> > +};<br>
>> > +<br>
>> > +}<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > _______________________________________________<br>
>> > cfe-commits mailing list<br>
>> > <a href="mailto:cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu">cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
>> > <a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits" target="_blank">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits</a><br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>