MaskRay added a comment. In D88712#2324105 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D88712#2324105>, @rsmith wrote:
> What are the expected semantics in this case? Is this: > > - the function is still the builtin, but if it ends up being a libcall, call > a function with a different asm name, or > - the function is not considered to be the builtin any more, or > - something else? > > I think this patch is approximately the first thing, but it's also cutting > off emission for cases where we wouldn't emit a libcall. Should we make that > distinction? Yes, we do the first one. I mentioned the limitation in the description. This happens with some functions like `abs` which clang has customized emit without using a library call. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D88712/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D88712 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
