This is an archive of the discontinued LLVM Phabricator instance.

libc++: integral types trap on PNaCl
ClosedPublic

Authored by jfb on Nov 25 2014, 4:33 PM.

Details

Reviewers
dschuff
danalbert

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

jfb updated this revision to Diff 16634.Nov 25 2014, 4:33 PM
jfb retitled this revision from to libc++: integral types trap on PNaCl.
jfb added reviewers: dschuff, danalbert.
jfb added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).
dschuff accepted this revision.Nov 25 2014, 4:35 PM
dschuff edited edge metadata.

LGTM

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Nov 25 2014, 4:35 PM
danalbert accepted this revision.Nov 25 2014, 4:35 PM
danalbert edited edge metadata.

LGTM.

jfb updated this revision to Diff 16657.Nov 26 2014, 9:51 AM
jfb edited edge metadata.

Rebase, fix repo issue.

jfb closed this revision.Nov 26 2014, 11:20 AM

Committed as r222842.

EricWF added a subscriber: EricWF.Nov 26 2014, 12:47 PM

Any opposition for this being included 3.5.1?

/Eric

jfb added a comment.Nov 26 2014, 1:29 PM

Committed as r222842.

In D6411#14, @EricWF wrote:

Any opposition for this being included 3.5.1?

/Eric

No opposition, but I wouldn't do extra work either since I'm OK on this just being in 3.6 instead.

It doesn't really seem to fit the criteria for being in a *.1 release... it's not fixing a regression.

In previous conversations about the criteria there was some agreement that non-regression bug fixes could be included. I don't think libc++ had any regressions between 3.5 and now. I'm open to only considering regression fixes but I would like some guidance on this issue.

In that light, this does seem pretty benign.

In D6411#19, @EricWF wrote:

I don't think libc++ had any regressions between 3.5 and now.

Didn't you fix an ASAN failure?

In D6411#21, @danalbert wrote:
In D6411#19, @EricWF wrote:

I don't think libc++ had any regressions between 3.5 and now.

Didn't you fix an ASAN failure?

The one in <vector>? Yes. I guess that would be a regression. Thanks.