AntonBikineev added a comment.
> No, it sounds like we need a proposal for > `[[likely_unless_the_optimizer_decides_otherwise]]` -- the `[[likely]]` > attribute was intended for always-likely optimization decisions. Well, whatever the default behavior is chosen. > I agree that we should be consistent, but there's different ways we can be > consistent. Consistent with what the feature paper intended? Consistent with > our past decisions? Consistent with how other implementations behave? What I meant is that if the status quo is preserved, the never taken [[likely]] branch would be considered as "unlikely'' after PGO (the purpose of this patch). > What do other implementations that support PGO do? If PGO implementations > consistently behave a certain way, that would be interesting to know. I just checked GCC and it seems like it considers likely as a forcing optimization: https://godbolt.org/z/69E3383cq Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D134456/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D134456 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
