================
@@ -673,7 +673,7 @@ int hoo(void) {
//
//
// CHECK: Function Attrs: noinline nounwind optnone
-// CHECK-LABEL: define {{[^@]+}}@fmv_inline._MlseMrdm
+// CHECK-LABEL: define {{[^@]+}}@fmv_inline._MlseMrdma
----------------
labrinea wrote:
I raised this with the GCC team, I don't have an answer yet but I believe GCC
only accepts "rdma" on the attribute (so I suppose that makes its way to the
mangled name?). I remember you raised this matter again in a previous review,
when we changed priorities and the mangling was affected. That is a good point
but I think first we need to agree whether those functions are part of the ABI
or not. Right now I don't see why they need to be. We could even make then have
internal linkage, no? If I am mistaken a counter example would help, thanks!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80540
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
