pcc marked 4 inline comments as done. ================ Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGVTables.cpp:588 @@ +587,3 @@ + if (auto *F = dyn_cast<llvm::Function>(Cache)) + F->setUnnamedAddr(llvm::GlobalValue::UnnamedAddr::Global); + Cache = llvm::ConstantExpr::getBitCast(Cache, CGM.Int8PtrTy); ---------------- rsmith wrote: > Do you have any idea why we're doing this? It looks wrong to me. These ABI > entry points are exposed and could certainly have their addresses taken and > used in this translation unit. I introduced this in D18071. Although a translation unit can take the address of one of these functions, that would involve declaring a function with a reserved name, so I believe we'd be allowed to impose restrictions such as `unnamed_addr` on the address.
Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D22642 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
