majnemer added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D22900#501597, @aaboud wrote:
> Reverting https://reviews.llvm.org/rL244207, would be fine if we assure that > PR24235, is fixed in another way. > I added Reid who helped reviewing the original patch > https://reviews.llvm.org/D11476. ISTM that the DWARF spec intended such thunks to be encoded as `DW_AT_trampoline`. That seems more appropriate than relying on codegen emitting a tailcall. This way the debugger can make the policy decision of whether or not thunks should show up in the backtrace. In any case, correctness must always trump all else. Reverting to green should take precedence over a QoI bug like PR24235. https://reviews.llvm.org/D22900 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
