On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 07:38:08PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 08:44:28PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> >> +
> >> + for (shadow = shadow_first; shadow <= shadow_last; shadow++) {
> >> + if (*shadow != tag) {
> >> + /* Report invalid-access bug here */
> >> + return;
> >
> > Huh? Should that be a TODO?
>
> This is fixed in one of the next commits. I decided to split the main
> runtime logic and the reporting parts, so this comment is a
> placeholder, which is replaced with the proper error reporting
> function call later in the patch series. I can make it a /* TODO:
> comment */, if you think that looks better.
It might be preferable to introdcue the report functions first (i.e.
swap this patch with the next one).
Those will be unused, but since they're not static, you shouldn't get
any build warnings. Then the hooks can call the report functions as soon
as they're introduced.
Thanks,
Mark.
