[PATCH] D96203: [clang][patch] Modify sanitizer options names: renaming blacklist to blocklist

[Melanie Blower via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

mibintc added a comment.

In D96203#2559426 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203#2559426>, @vitalybuka wrote:

>>> FWIW I would prefer denylist as well. (Also uses of whitelist should be allowlist, but also incremental :)
>
> I feel like existing and proposed value do match the meaning of this list.
> maybe ignorelist, skiplist (can be confused with data structure?), or just asan_no_sanitize.txt or even no_asan.txt

Would you use ignorelist (skiplist) in the option name as well as the filename?  Can you recommend a name for the antonym as well (i.e. replacement for whitelist)

>> I can change D82244 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D82244> used blocklist to denylist . If there is no need for compatibility, I'll just replace the strings. If there is need for compatibility, I can make blocklist an alias.
>
> I don't think we need compatibility for D82244 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D82244>. If we change clang, we can update D82244 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D82244> to the same for consistency.

Yes I agree.



================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Driver/SanitizerArgsTest.cpp:134-136
               Contains(StrEq("-fxray-always-instrument=" + XRayWhitelist)));
   EXPECT_THAT(Command.getArguments(),
+              Contains(StrEq("-fxray-never-instrument=" + XRayBlocklist)));
----------------
vitalybuka wrote:
> always/never?
Can you say a few more works here? You mean use always as replacement for white, and never as replacement for black? 


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203