ChuanqiXu added a comment. In D97915#2863615 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97915#2863615>, @ychen wrote:
> That's just my conclusion based on @rjmccall's suggestion > (https://reviews.llvm.org/D100739#2717582) and my following responses. I guess you got the conclusion from this: > 2d. Use the correct allocator for the frame alignment; both allocators are > (allowed to be) ODR-used, but only one would be dynamically used. This is > what would be necessary for the implementation I suggested above. In reality > there won't be any dynamic overhead because we should always be able to fold > the branch after allocation. It looks like necessary to emit two BBs in the frontend which use the different allocators. Then we prune the branch in the middle end. But I still feel like that there are redundancies in current implementation. Let me think more about it. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97915/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D97915 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
