================
@@ -84,12 +84,12 @@ define void @pr66984(ptr %arg) personality ptr
@__CxxFrameHandler3 {
; X86_64-NEXT: movq %rcx, {{[-0-9]+}}(%r{{[sb]}}p) # 8-byte Spill
; X86_64-NEXT: .Ltmp0:
; X86_64-NEXT: callq throw
+; X86_64-NEXT: nop
----------------
sivadeilra wrote:
Well, in this case, the following instruction is EH_LABEL. We could use the
same heuristic of "does this CALL have successors?" but in this case I checked,
and `MI->getParent()->succ_empty()` is false, I assume because of the unwinding
successor.
In this case, `MI->getParent()->succ_size() == 2`, I assume because `throw` is
not marked `noreturn` and there is an edge to that `unreachable` block. Would
we see different IR with optimizations?
I've been using `succ_empty()` for "is this call no-return?", but clearly that
isn't the best test. Is there a better way to check for that, here?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144745
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
