rjmccall added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/TargetInfo.cpp:2980 - return (Ty->isPromotableIntegerType() ? ABIArgInfo::getExtend(Ty) - : ABIArgInfo::getDirect()); + if (!Ty->isExtIntType()) + return (Ty->isPromotableIntegerType() ? ABIArgInfo::getExtend(Ty) ---------------- erichkeane wrote: > rjmccall wrote: > > Presumably *some* `ExtInt` types should be returned directly. > Right, and they are. This is only for cases where we request an 'indirect > result', so cases where we've already decided that it cannot be passed direct. > > At this point, the 'classify' step has already been done, which would have > decided that <=128 bit values are passed 'direct', and we've requested an > indirect. At least as far as I can tell from this code/debugging. Oh, I see. So the current code is intentionally using a direct IR return in some cases and then allowing LLVM to lower it as an indirect return? I didn't think we ever did that, and I'm really not sure it's a good idea, so I definitely agree with not doing it for ExtInt types. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D78785/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D78785 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
