================
@@ -389,14 +389,28 @@ void CGRecordLowering::accumulateFields(bool
isNonVirtualBaseType) {
// Empty fields have no storage.
++Field;
} else {
- // Use base subobject layout for the potentially-overlapping field,
- // as it is done in RecordLayoutBuilder
- Members.push_back(MemberInfo(
- bitsToCharUnits(getFieldBitOffset(*Field)), MemberInfo::Field,
- Field->isPotentiallyOverlapping()
- ? getStorageType(Field->getType()->getAsCXXRecordDecl())
- : getStorageType(*Field),
- *Field));
+ CharUnits CurOffset = bitsToCharUnits(getFieldBitOffset(*Field));
+ llvm::Type *StorageType = getStorageType(*Field);
+
+ // Detect cases when the next field needs to be packed into tail padding
+ // of a record field. This is typically caused by [[no_unique_address]],
+ // but we try to infer when that is the case rather than checking for the
+ // attribute explicitly because the attribute is typically not present in
+ // debug info. Use the base subobject LLVM struct type in these cases,
----------------
efriedma-quic wrote:
Maybe state more explicitly that this is an issue when the class layout is
computed from debug info?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122197
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
