[PATCH] Protection against stack-based memory corruption errors using SafeStack

[Peter Collingbourne]

================
Comment at: test/CodeGen/X86/safestack.ll:379
@@ +378,3 @@
+;          safestack attribute
+; Requires no protector.
+define void @test7b() nounwind uwtable readnone safestack {
----------------
pcc wrote:
> What? This seems like it needs protection to me. The callee could store the integer somewhere, or use inttoptr, or something.
Oh, I see that this is because the function (wrongly) has the readnone attribute. I'll fix the test case.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D6094

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/