uenoku accepted this revision.
uenoku added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
I think the logic is sound. It looks good to me.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Attributor.cpp:2618
+ else
+ Attrs.emplace_back(Attribute::get(Ctx, "no-capture-maybe-returned"));
+ }
----------------
Maybe we need an exact definition for `no-capture-maybe-returned` in LangRef.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Attributor.cpp:2674
+ /// "no-capture-maybe-returned", the user is added to the \p PotentialCopies
+ /// set. All values in \p PotentialCopies are later tracked aswell. For every
+ /// explored use we decrement \p RemainingUsesToExplore. Once it reaches 0,
----------------
aswell
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Attributor.cpp:2761
+ /// Register \p CS as potential copy of the value we are checking.
+ void addPotentialCopyIfNecessary(CallSite CS) {
+ PotentialCopies.push_back(CS.getInstruction());
----------------
Why `IfNecessary`? It seems there is no check.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Attributor.cpp:2819
+
+ AAAlign::StateType T;
+ // TODO: Once we have memory behavior attributes we should use them here
----------------
Align?
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/Attributor.cpp:2864
+ // TODO: Once we have call site specific value information we can provide
+ // call site specific liveness liveness information and then it makes
+ // sense to specialize attributes for call sites arguments instead of
----------------
liveness liveness
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D59922/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D59922
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
