sdesmalen-arm wrote: > > Separately, it's probably worth ensuring that the LLVM inlining passes > > don't actually perform illegal inlining for functions marked always_inline; > > looking at the code, it looks like we might end up skipping the relevant > > checks. > > The `TargetTransformInfo::areInlineCompatible` function in llvm makes these > checks.
I think that Eli's point is that at the moment `areInlineCompatible` is not being called when using `always_inline`, which is something that needs changing. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/77936 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
