dexonsmith added a comment. In D134456#3827263 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134456#3827263>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> My worry is that parallel attributes will be used as: > > #if __has_cpp_attribute(clang::likely_but_honor_this_one) > #define LIKELY [[clang::likely_but_honor_this_one]] > #elif __has_cpp_attribute(likely) > #define LIKELY [[likely]] > #else > #define LIKELY > #endif To be clear, I was imagining: if (always_false()) [[likely]] [[clang::nopgo]] { // ... } where ``nopgo`` might be independently useful for telling clang to ignore any collected PGO data when estimating branch weights in a particular control flow block. Some users might combine the two into a macro ("always ignore the profile when I say something is likely!"), but I don't think there'd be a cascade. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D134456/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D134456 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits