momo5502 added a comment.
In D115456#3216811 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115456#3216811>, @majnemer wrote:
> This is looking great! Just a few more questions.
>
> What is the behavior with something like:
>
> thread_local int x = 2;
> int f() {
> return x;
> }
>
> I'm wondering if we need to move this logic
> <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/1f07a4a5699b73582461880e716e6692cbe3d6a6/clang/lib/CodeGen/ItaniumCXXABI.cpp#L391-L392>
> into the generic C++ ABI implementation.
The MS compiler only emits the dynamic initializers for variables with
constructors/destructors, just like it is currently done here for the Itanium
ABI.
I also thought about adopting that behaviour, but I think threre are edge-cases
when triggering dynamic TLS initialization even for constant variables is
useful.
For example there might be custom TLS callbacks that can affect the value of
this variable.
If desired, I can change it to match the behaviour of MS, but I thought it
could be beneficial to diverge in this case.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D115456/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D115456
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
