apazos added a comment.
> Is it worth trying to disallow tail call optimization completely if this flag > is enabled? I'm not sure what GCC does exactly. but this seems to be the > behaviour. I had reported above that I have already run that test: with "-fno-optimize-sibling-calls -msave-restore", i.e., disabling tail calls when m-save-restore is enabled. But it seems a better solution is to optimistically apply -msave-restore when there are no tail calls of any type in a function, instead of disabling tail calls completed. Let tail call optimization prevail over msave-restore. No LLVM target is disabling tail calls. So you can update the patch according to this solution plan. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62686/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62686 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
