hfinkel requested changes to this revision.
hfinkel added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Unfortunately, we cannot do this kind of thing just because it seems to make
sense. The language semantics must be exactly satisfied by the IR-level
semantics. I certainly agree that it would make sense for users to be able to
mark invariant loads, but this mechanism simply might not be the right one.
One problem here is that, with something like:
char test2(X *x) {
const char* __restrict p = &(x->b);
return *p;
}
what happens when the function is inlined? Does the "invariantness" only still
apply to accesses within the scope of the local restrict pointer? I believe
that it would not, and that would be a problem because later code might legally
modify the relevant data.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75285/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75285
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
