efriedma added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/windows-seh-EHa-CppCondiTemps.cpp:3 +// FIXME: this check appears to be miscompiled? +// XFAIL: * ---------------- lebedev.ri wrote: > tentzen wrote: > > lebedev.ri wrote: > > > This test broke once we always started adding (outermost) UB scope for > > > nounwind functions. > > > I don't quite get what is going wrong. It could be a bug in SEH handling. > > > Can someone who has some idea about that code take a look and suggest a > > > fix? > > > @tentzen ? > > By definition, non-unwind function I think is for Synchronous EH. So this > > Sanitizer check should exclude Asynchronous EH functions, those with option > > -fasync-exceptions. > > > I do not understand. > If the function can unwind, then why is it marked `nounwind`? > This kind of thing is exactly what i was afraid of with those SEH patches. clang should not be marking functions "nounwind" in -fasync-exceptions mode; if it is, I'd consider that a bug. (I assume someone just forgot to add a check to some code that adds nounwind.) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137381/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137381 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
