[llvm-commits] [PATCH] Add malloc call utility functions

[Chris Lattner]

On Sep 11, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Dan Gohman wrote:

> Hi Victor,
>
> If MallocHelper is going to replace MallocInst, how will it support
> -fno-builtins?  With MallocInst, one at least had the option of
> omitting the RaiseAllocations pass (though it seems llvm-gcc and
> clang don't actually do this, which is a bug). With MallocHelper,
> how can -fno-builtins be implemented?

In order to support -fno-builtin-foo, we'd want to introduce a  
function attribute saying "not a builtin" and stick it on foo.  This  
doesn't exist today, but shouldn't be particularly hard.

-Chris