This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH v2] Implement no_sanitize function attribute


On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:24:47PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 10:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:04:53AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> >> diff --git a/gcc/common.opt b/gcc/common.opt
> >> index 13305558d2d..5e9942d5100 100644
> >> --- a/gcc/common.opt
> >> +++ b/gcc/common.opt
> >> @@ -222,9 +222,13 @@ bool flag_opts_finished
> >>  Variable
> >>  unsigned int flag_sanitize
> >>  
> >> +###
> >> +Common RejectNegative Joined UInteger Var(flag_no_sanitize_fn) PerFunction
> >> +No sanitize flags for a function
> > 
> > This looks weird, you are redefining the -### option which is normally
> > a driver option.
> 
> I know. I was thinking that it's also a 'dummy' value.

It is not.

> > I would have thought you just want a Variable, like the one right below
> > this.  Aren't all "Variable"s per-function?
> 
> Unfortunately not. Well, probably adding new type 'PerFunctionVariable' would be
> solution. Then optc-save-gen.awk needs to be learned how to save/restore these variables.
> 
> Is it the way we want to go?

Yes.  We already have TargetVariable.  Or allow specifying
Variable PerFunction

CCing Joseph as option handling maintainer.

	Jakub


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]