[llvm-commits] [PATCH] Annotate BumpPtrAllocator for MemorySanitizer

[Evgeniy Stepanov]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:49 AM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 28 January 2013 06:22, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>   Maybe put this into lib/Support/Valgrind.cpp and/or
>>> include/llvm/Support/Valgrind.h ?
>>>   Or maybe rename these files into something Valgrind-neutral?
>>
>>
>> I'd prefer renaming them to something valgrind-neutral, but I simply can
>> not think of any name. If you can think of something, go for it.
>>
>> There needs to be some meaning to this name. For instance Sanitizer.h
>> would work, as it's just as acceptable for sanitizer macros as Valgrind.h is
>> for valgrind macros.
>
>
> For sanitizer functions, shouldn't the sanitizer ship a builtin header file
> we include to get their declarations?

Yes, I think we discussed it briefly once. Should we install
sanitizer/*_interface.h headers to lib/clang/$VERSION/include?

> For the compatibility macros that wrap these in LLVM's code to remain
> interoperable, I would vote for either Compiler.h, a new Sanitizer.h, or
> MemoryAnnotations.h in order of vaguely decreasing preference.

Compiler.h does not really capture the spirit of Valgrind annotations.
MemoryAnnotations.h, or maybe DynamicTools.h, or DynamicAnnotations.h?

>
>>
>>>   Nick Lewycky (who added Valgrind.*), WDYT?
>>>
>>> http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D336
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> llvm-commits mailing list
>>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> llvm-commits mailing list
>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>>
>