[PATCH] D21920: Fix for Bug 26903 adds support to inline __builtin_mempcpy

[Sunita_Marathe via llvm-commits]

Sunita_Marathe added a comment.

Hi Krzysztof,

Thank you for your comments.

Yes, since the 2 functions only differ in their return value it seemed appropriate for the lowering of a call to mempcpy to always be done as if it were a call to memcpy, followed by the adjustment of the return pointer,  to allow existing optimizations for memcpy to be leveraged.

Your point about what if the runtime library provides a mempcpy is valid.   But would there be any reason for the runtime library of a platform to have a version of mempcpy which is of such a nature that a call to mempcpy cannot be replaced by a call to memcpy?   My thinking had been that substituting memcpy for mempcpy would not negatively affect the user.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D21920