[PATCH] D109888: Bitcast wrapped in a call obscures function attributes, pessimizing MemorySSA

[Nikita Popov via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

nikic accepted this revision.
nikic added a comment.

I'm okay with this for the case of function attributes in particular, because those don't really depend on ABI considerations. I will say though that you're brushing really close to UB here, and I may push back against extending other places in this direction. Like, say you have a `void(i128)` and call it as `void(i64, i64)` knowing that under the particular ABI used those two i64s will assemble into an i128 -- is that a legal call? In what manner would a function param attribute correlate with call arguments there?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D109888/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D109888