[llvm] [BPF] Handle traps with kfunc call __bpf_trap (PR #131731)

[via llvm-commits]

4ast wrote:

> I'm still not completely happy with this; see #136603 for my most recent commentary on producing warnings based on compiler optimizations. (That's not BPF, but under the proposal here, a similar construct compiled to BPF would produce a BPF verifier error.) But Linux kernel developers have a different perspective on how a compiler should work... I'm not sure how to bridge the gap.

I don't see how issues with __builtin_dynamic_object_size() related to this diff.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131731