[LLVMdev] Proposal for improving llvm.gcroot (summarized)

Reid Kleckner reid.kleckner at gmail.com
Fri Apr 1 12:52:19 PDT 2011

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is very similar to the problem of representing lexical scopes in
> debug info. The llvm.dbg.region.* intrinsics were the wrong way of
> doing it, because of the problems I mentioned above. Now we use
> metadata attached  to each instruction to say what scope it is in,
> which is much better, because it is robust against optimisation
> passes.

Of course, using metadata isn't acceptable for gc because it can be
dropped, and adding something like it for gc wouldn't be acceptable to
people writing optimizations.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list