[clang] [llvm] [mlir] [IR] Make semantics of strictfp consistent v2 (PR #211769)

[Ramkumar Ramachandra via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -2800,7 +2800,8 @@ fn -> other_fn -> other_fn ; fn is norecurse
     optimizations that require assumptions about the floating-point rounding
     mode or that might alter the state of floating-point status flags that
     might otherwise be set or cleared by calling this function. LLVM will
-    not introduce any new floating-point instructions that may trap.
+    not introduce any new floating-point instructions that may trap. All
+    function definitions that contain strictfp calls must be marked strictfp.
----------------
artagnon wrote:

Why is it transitive? You can mark the function strictfp in the _declaration_ and the caller definition wouldn't need to be marked strictfp? What I meant is that if the _CallBase's attributes_ contains strictfp, the calling function must be marked strictfp? Aren't constrained FP intrinsics merely a special-case of strictfp functions? Yes, we could clarify this?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/211769