================
@@ -3920,7 +3920,8 @@ void
MicrosoftMangleContextImpl::mangleThreadSafeStaticGuardVariable(
msvc_hashing_ostream MHO(Out);
MicrosoftCXXNameMangler Mangler(*this, MHO);
- Mangler.getStream() << "?$TSS" << GuardNum << '@';
+ Mangler.getStream() << "?";
+ Mangler.mangleSourceName("$TSS" + llvm::utostr(GuardNum));
----------------
tahonermann wrote:
The inclusion of `$` in the source name is correct here. Without that, names
might be incorrectly resolved to the implicit name of the guard variable. The
added test checks for this. If `$` were not included in the source name, the
mangled name for the guard variable would be:
- `?$TSS0@?1??singleton@ 0 NS@@SAAAU02@XZ@4HA`
instead of:
- `?$TSS0@?1??singleton@ TSS0@ NS@@SAAAU23@XZ@4HA`
Some brief searches for `mangleSourceName()` in `MicrosoftMangle.cpp` suggests
there are quite a few cases of `@` *not* being included in the name registered
as a back reference. These cases appear in the following functions. It is
difficult to tell if these are intentional or are issues that should be fixed.
- `mangleObjCProtocol()`
- `mangleObjCLifetime()`
- `mangleObjCKindOfType()`
- `mangleAddressSpaceType()`
- `mangleType(const ComplexType *, ...)`
- `mangleType(const VectorType *, ...)`
- `mangleType(const ObjCObjectType *, ...)`
- `mangleType(const AtomicType *, ...)`
- `mangleType(const PipeType *, ...)`
- `mangleType(const BitIntType *, ...)`
There are also some other cases where it looks like a `$` prefixed name is
included in the mangled name without being registered as a back reference.
These are more difficult to spot without knowing the mangling scheme well. One
such example is the one below. Should `$RT` be registered as a back reference?
I didn't try to prove it one way or another.
- `mangleReferenceTemporary()`
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85300
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
