[Lldb-commits] [clang] [lldb] [UBSan][BoundsSafety] Implement support for more expressive "trap reasons" (PR #154618)

[Thurston Dang via lldb-commits]

================
@@ -125,14 +125,22 @@ Non-comprehensive list of changes in this release
 
 - Added ``__builtin_elementwise_minnumnum`` and ``__builtin_elementwise_maxnumnum``.
 
-- Trapping UBSan (e.g. ``-fsanitize-trap=undefined``) now emits a string describing the reason for
-  trapping into the generated debug info. This feature allows debuggers (e.g. LLDB) to display
-  the reason for trapping if the trap is reached. The string is currently encoded in the debug
-  info as an artificial frame that claims to be inlined at the trap location. The function used
-  for the artificial frame is an artificial function whose name encodes the reason for trapping.
-  The encoding used is currently the same as ``__builtin_verbose_trap`` but might change in the future.
-  This feature is enabled by default but can be disabled by compiling with
-  ``-fno-sanitize-annotate-debug-info-traps``.
+- Trapping UBSan (e.g. ``-fsanitize-trap=undefined``) now emits a string
+  describing the reason for trapping into the generated debug info. This feature
+  allows debuggers (e.g. LLDB) to display the reason for trapping if the trap is
+  reached. The string is currently encoded in the debug info as an artificial
+  frame that claims to be inlined at the trap location. The function used for
+  the artificial frame is an artificial function whose name encodes the reason
+  for trapping. The encoding used is currently the same as
+  ``__builtin_verbose_trap`` but might change in the future. This feature is
+  enabled by default but can be disabled by compiling with
+  ``-fno-sanitize-debug-trap-reasons``. The feature has a ``basic`` and
+  ``detailed`` mode (the default). The ``basic`` mode emits a hard-coded string
+  per trap kind (e.g. integer overflow) and the ``detailed`` mode emits a more
+  descriptive string describing each individual trap. The ``detailed`` mode
----------------
thurstond wrote:

Suggestion: "(e.g., `signed integer addition overflow in '2147483647 + 1'`)"

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154618