[PATCH] D138958: [clang] Better UX for Clang’s unwind-affecting attributes
Nuno Lopes via Phabricator via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Jan 16 04:02:52 PST 2023
nlopes added a comment.
The issue is the function call, not the stores.
Stores are valid as long as they are to local memory (stack or allocated by the function).
Because of the call, you can't tag it as `memory(none)`. But you may be able to tag it with inaccessiblemem if the call is also marked as such. Otherwise, no.
Performance wise it shouldn't matter much. How many functions are tagged with pure/const in source code? So here I would lean towards correctness.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D138958/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D138958
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list