[zorg][patch] r194758 - Patch by Rick Foos!

[Galina Kistanova]

May I also suggest renaming SanitizerOption param to
BuildWithSanitizerOption or something to highlight that this param changes
the behavior, please?

Thanks

Galina



On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Rick Foos <rfoos at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> > Sorry so slow, bad python day.
> >
> > Tested locally with llvm-clang-lld-x86_64-debian-fast, and
> > llvm-clang-lld-x86_64-ubuntu-13.04-sanitize-address.
> >
> > The debian fast builder is running without errors as expected.
> >
> > The address sanitizer has one test failure, but this looks like a real
> fail
> > since it successfully building and running 16K+ tests.
> >
> > Happy Friday,
> > Rick Foos
> >
> > ---
> > Address sanitizer fails one test.
> >
> > test test 1 unexpected failures 75 expected failures 45 unsupported tests
> > 16326 expected passes failed ( 5 mins, 38 secs )
> >
> > stdio
> > Clang::annotate-deep-statements.cpp
> > warnings (15)
> >
> >
> >
> > There is a ninjaOptions that contains jobs and loadaverage from
> **kwargs, or
> > null for existing behavior. Probably not the final answer, but works and
> > doesn't interfere with anyone else.
> >
> > If SanitizerOption is none: we update compiler-rt, existing behavior.
>
> Please also add a comment explaining why compiler-rt is disabled in
> this case.  (Sort of obvious now, but not so obvious for someone
> reading this code later).
>
> Dmitri
>
> --
> main(i,j){for(i=2;;i++){for(j=2;j<i;j++){if(!(i%j)){j=0;break;}}if
> (j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>*/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20131115/649c2644/attachment.html>