[PATCH] D95122: [Libcalls, Attrs] Annotate libcalls with noundef

[Dávid Bolvanský via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

xbolva00 added a comment.

In D95122#2513428 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95122#2513428>, @jdoerfert wrote:

> In D95122#2512747 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95122#2512747>, @aqjune wrote:
>
>> Since this issue only happens when the undef value is involved, another solution is to revert D87994 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D87994> as suggested & make load/store's pointer noundef & rely on the future that the undef value will be finally removed.
>> I don't think this will cause a problem in practice as well even if undef persists; memory sanitizer is already catching the case.
>
>
>
> In D95122#2513162 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95122#2513162>, @xbolva00 wrote:
>
>> In D95122#2512747 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95122#2512747>, @aqjune wrote:
>>
>>> Since this issue only happens when the undef value is involved, another solution is to revert D87994 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D87994> as suggested & make load/store's pointer noundef & rely on the future that the undef value will be finally removed.
>>> I don't think this will cause a problem in practice as well even if undef persists; memory sanitizer is already catching the case.
>>
>> +1
>
> I don't understand what this has to do with the `undef` value, or maybe I misinterpret what that means. However, if we revert that patch, I think we do ourselves a favor.

Proposal for revert:: https://reviews.llvm.org/D95174


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D95122/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D95122