[PATCH] D43702: [asan] Fix bug where suppression of overlapping accesses was ignored.

[Dan Liew via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

delcypher marked 5 inline comments as done.
delcypher added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lib/asan/asan_interceptors_memintrinsics.h:144
+          HaveStackTraceBasedSuppressions() && IsStackTraceSuppressed(&stack); \
+      if (!suppressed) {                                                       \
+        ReportStringFunctionMemoryRangesOverlap(name, offset1, length1,        \
----------------
kubamracek wrote:
> delcypher wrote:
> > kubamracek wrote:
> > > Can we also check for suppressions based on interceptor name? See `ACCESS_MEMORY_RANGE` above, which is attempting suppressions both by name and by stacktrace.
> > `ACCESS_MEMORY_RANGE` has access to a `ctx` object. Where do I get that from?
> I think we can pass `ctx` from the caller(s), all the callers already seem to have it. Or we can use `name` directly here, but actually removing it in favor of `ctx` sounds better to me.
I've added support for doing the suppression by interceptor name. However I've not made the `ctx` change. That looks like an orthogonal refactor which I do in a separate patch.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D43702