This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL252369: Add support for function attribute
'not_tail_called'. (authored by ahatanak).
Changed prior to commit:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922?vs=39003&id=39607#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews
ahatanak added a comment.
Thanks, I'll see how the review for the llvm-side patch goes and commit both
patches after it is approved.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi
aaron.ballman accepted this revision.
aaron.ballman added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM!
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:5374
@@ +5373,3 @@
+
+ // Virtual functions cannot be marked as 'notail'.
+ if (auto *Attr = ND.getAttr())
ahatanak added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:5374
@@ +5373,3 @@
+
+ // Virtual functions cannot be marked as 'notail'.
+ if (auto *Attr = ND.getAttr())
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I am not home yet, and so I don't have the source code to try this
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:5374
@@ +5373,3 @@
+
+ // Virtual functions cannot be marked as 'notail'.
+ if (auto *Attr = ND.getAttr())
I am not home yet, and so I don't have the source code to try this out, but I
have
ahatanak updated this revision to Diff 39003.
ahatanak added a comment.
Added test case that produces an error diagnostic if an argument is passed for
not_tail_called.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922
Files:
include/clang/Basic/Attr.td
include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td
include/clang/Basic/Di
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: test/Sema/attr-notail.c:9
@@ +8,3 @@
+}
+
+int g0 __attribute__((not_tail_called)); // expected-warning
{{'not_tail_called' attribute only applies to functions}}
ahatanak wrote:
> I didn't understand what kind of t
ahatanak added inline comments.
Comment at: test/Sema/attr-notail.c:9
@@ +8,3 @@
+}
+
+int g0 __attribute__((not_tail_called)); // expected-warning
{{'not_tail_called' attribute only applies to functions}}
I didn't understand what kind of test case is required fo
ahatanak updated this revision to Diff 38967.
ahatanak added a comment.
Fixed test cases:
- Added a test case for the attribute being specified on a variable.
- Added a missing 's' to "virtual function" in the check strings.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922
Files:
include/clang/Basic/Attr.td
ahatanak added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:5374
@@ +5373,3 @@
+
+ // Virtual functions cannot be marked as 'notail'.
+ if (auto *Attr = ND.getAttr())
aaron.ballman wrote:
> Is there a reason this is here instead of SemaDeclAttr.cpp? It see
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:5374
@@ +5373,3 @@
+
+ // Virtual functions cannot be marked as 'notail'.
+ if (auto *Attr = ND.getAttr())
Is there a reason this is here instead of SemaDeclAttr.cpp? It seems like the
decl
ping
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Akira Hatanaka wrote:
> ahatanak updated this revision to Diff 37816.
> ahatanak added a comment.
>
> Address review comments:
>
> 1. Renamed the attribute to "not_tail_called".
>
> I chose "not_tail_called" over "notailcall" or "notail" to better
> distingu
ahatanak updated this revision to Diff 37816.
ahatanak added a comment.
Address review comments:
1. Renamed the attribute to "not_tail_called".
I chose "not_tail_called" over "notailcall" or "notail" to better distinguish
it from the attribute that is proposed in http://reviews.llvm.org/D12547
> On 2015-Oct-13, at 09:55, Aaron Ballman wrote:
>
> aaron.ballman added a comment.
>
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922#265452, @ahatanak wrote:
>
>> I think there are a couple of things that have to be discussed:
>>
>> 1. Name of the attribute: Should it be "notail" or "notailcall"? Perhap
ahatanak marked an inline comment as done.
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td:1619
@@ +1618,3 @@
+ let Content = [{
+Tail call optimization is not performed on direct calls to a function marked
``notail``.
+ }];
Perhaps direct call isn't the right term
ahatanak updated this revision to Diff 37437.
ahatanak added a comment.
Address some of the review comments:
- Added a c++ test which tests the c++ spelling of the attribute on member
functions and shows which virtual functions calls get marked as "notail" in the
IR.
- Added a check that was mi
aaron.ballman added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922#265452, @ahatanak wrote:
> I think there are a couple of things that have to be discussed:
>
> 1. Name of the attribute: Should it be "notail" or "notailcall"? Perhaps it
> should be named something like "nodirecttail" to indicate
ahatanak updated this revision to Diff 37172.
ahatanak added a comment.
I've made some changes following the discussion I had and the feedback I got on
the llvm-side patch.
This is the link to the discussion thread:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.cvs/271105/
The difference be
dexonsmith added a subscriber: dexonsmith.
dexonsmith added a comment.
I wonder if 'notailcall' be better, since it contains a verb (like 'noinline').
I don't have a strong opinion; just putting the alternative out there.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922
__
I wonder if 'notailcall' be better, since it contains a verb (like 'noinline').
I don't have a strong opinion; just putting the alternative out there.
> On 2015-Sep-16, at 19:21, Akira Hatanaka via cfe-commits
> wrote:
>
> ahatanak created this revision.
> ahatanak added a reviewer: aaron.bal
ahatanak added a comment.
The llvm-side patch is here: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12923
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12922
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ahatanak created this revision.
ahatanak added a reviewer: aaron.ballman.
ahatanak added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
This patch adds support for a new function attribute "notail". The attribute is
used to disable tail call optimization on calls to functions marked with the
attribute.
This is dif
22 matches
Mail list logo
