ChuanqiXu marked 2 inline comments as done.
ChuanqiXu added a comment.

In D115867#3270137 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115867#3270137>, @Quuxplusone 
wrote:

> LGTM now, modulo my suggested edits (and the necessary corresponding edits in 
> the test case).
> I don't think I'm really qualified to accept, but as nobody else is looking, 
> and my name is the one with the red next to it, I'll at least change mine to 
> green. I //recommend// getting someone else to look at this before landing it.

Thanks for helping to reword! This idea is inspired by @rjmccall so I guess 
this one should be good to him. Given the current situation, it might not be 
easy to find someone else to look at it. I would wait for 1~2 days before 
landing.



================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td:6140-6142
+Note that a coroutine function wouldn't get inlined in O0 if it is marked with 
"always_inline".
+In other optimization levels, only the first part of the coroutine - "ramp 
function"<https://llvm.org/docs/Coroutines.html>`_
+can be guaranteed to be inlined.
----------------
Quuxplusone wrote:
> Why is the `-O0` behavior different for coroutines, versus regular functions? 
> My understanding from this documentation is that `-O0 + always_inline` 
> //will// attempt inlining for regular functions, but will //not// attempt 
> inlining (not even of the ramp) for coroutines. That feels asymmetric and 
> weird.
> So my default assumption is that maybe this documentation is wrong?
> ...ah, I see you mention below that this is a known deficiency. So I think 
> this documentation is OK after you take my suggested edit. (I don't know if 
> it would be appropriate to mention the bug number in this documentation as 
> well, so I'll err on the side of not mentioning it.)
I have made a longer explanation at: 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/53413 (and I cite this in following 
comment). I feel it is not good to write something so long in this document. 


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D115867/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D115867

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to