[patch][rfc] Don't mangle fastcall and stdcall at the llvm level.

Rafael EspĂ­ndola rafael.espindola at gmail.com
Tue Oct 29 11:54:37 PDT 2013


In r192762 we changed clang to mangle these before printing IL. I am
now curious what are the opinions about when, if ever, can we drop the
equivalent mangling from llvm.

The attached patch simply changes the mangler to remove the special
treatment of fastcall and stdcall. Would something like that be OK for
3.5 or 4.0?

Another option is to first require that fastcall and stdcall functions
have names starting with '\01' for a release or two. That would make
sure that the meaning of any accepted file would remain the same.

Yet another option is to try to upgrade the file when reading. This is
tricky. The tool using the autougrade might not have the x86 target
registered, so we would be unable to compute the stack size of the
arguments (necessary for mangling these functions).

Cheers,
Rafael
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: t.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 7579 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20131029/cf64c44f/attachment.obj>


More information about the llvm-commits mailing list