lebedev.ri accepted this revision.
lebedev.ri marked an inline comment as done.
lebedev.ri added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Looks ok to me now in principle.
I have one more question about pointer variants though (see inline)
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGBuiltin.cpp:14321
+ if (Args.Src->getType()->isPointerTy()) {
+ /// TODO: Use ptrmask instead of ptrtoint+gep once it is optimized well.
+ // Result = Builder.CreateIntrinsic(
----------------
I honestly wonder if (at least for `align up`) that would result in worse
results,
but we'll see if/when such patch appears i guess..
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGBuiltin.cpp:14327
+ llvm::Value* Difference = Builder.CreateSub(Result, SrcAddr, "diff");
+ Result = Builder.CreateGEP(EmitCastToVoidPtr(Args.Src), Difference,
+ "aligned_result");
----------------
What's the semantics of these aligning builtins for pointers?
Is this GEP supposed to comply to the C17 6.5.6p8, C++ [expr.add]?
(TLDR: both the old pointer, and the newly-aligned pointer
must both point to the **same** array (allocated memory region))
I.e. can this GEP be `inbounds`? If it can, it'd be most great for
optimizations.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71499/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71499
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
