[PATCH] D67855: [X86] Add new calling convention that guarantees tail call optimization

[Jessica Paquette via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

paquette added a comment.

Looking back in the discussion, I think it's fine to have it act the same way as `fastcc`.

If we want to get rid of `GuaranteedTailCallOpt`, I don't think it's a good idea to have `tailcc` disregard (or error out on) disable-tail-calls. We will still want to have the option to produce normal calls when someone asks for it.

I think it would be good to hear @rnk's thoughts on this too.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D67855/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D67855