[PATCH] D86233: [LangRef] Define mustprogress attribute

[Atmn Patel via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

atmnpatel updated this revision to Diff 294391.
atmnpatel added a comment.

Addressed comments, does this sound like an appropriate wording for the behavior wrt callees?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D86233/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D86233

Files:
  llvm/docs/LangRef.rst


Index: llvm/docs/LangRef.rst
===================================================================
--- llvm/docs/LangRef.rst
+++ llvm/docs/LangRef.rst
@@ -1953,6 +1953,18 @@
     the function. The instrumentation checks that the return address for the
     function has not changed between the function prolog and epilog. It is
     currently x86_64-specific.
+``mustprogress``
+    This attribute indicates that the function is required to return, unwind,
+    or interact with the environment in an observable way e.g. via a
+    volatile memory access, I/O, or other synchronization. 
+    The ``mustprogress`` attribute is intended to model the
+    requirements of the first section of `[intro.progress] of the C++
+    Standard <http://eel.is/c++draft/intro.progress>`_. If a `mustprogress` 
+    function does not satisfy this contract, it is undefined behavior. A
+    non-interacting loop in a such a function is assumed to terminate,
+    and may be removed. This attribute does not apply transitively to callees,
+    but does apply for call sites within the function. Note that `willreturn`
+    implies `mustprogress`. 
 
 Call Site Attributes
 ----------------------


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D86233.294391.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1179 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20200925/8b33402a/attachment.bin>