================
@@ -118,6 +124,37 @@ llvm::Type *CodeGenTypes::ConvertTypeForMem(QualType T,
bool ForBitField) {
return R;
}
+bool CodeGenTypes::LLVMTypeLayoutMatchesAST(QualType ASTTy,
+ llvm::Type *LLVMTy) {
+ CharUnits ASTSize = Context.getTypeSizeInChars(ASTTy);
+ CharUnits LLVMSize =
+ CharUnits::fromQuantity(getDataLayout().getTypeAllocSize(LLVMTy));
+ return ASTSize == LLVMSize;
+}
+
+llvm::Type *CodeGenTypes::convertTypeForLoadStore(QualType T,
+ llvm::Type *LLVMTy) {
+ if (!LLVMTy)
+ LLVMTy = ConvertType(T);
+
+ if (!T->isBitIntType() && LLVMTy->isIntegerTy(1))
+ return llvm::IntegerType::get(getLLVMContext(),
+ (unsigned)Context.getTypeSize(T));
+
+ if (T->isBitIntType()) {
+ llvm::Type *R = ConvertType(T);
+ if (!LLVMTypeLayoutMatchesAST(T, R))
+ return llvm::Type::getIntNTy(
+ getLLVMContext(), Context.getTypeSizeInChars(T).getQuantity() * 8);
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
I would like to use LLVM's `iN` type when it actually has the right data
layout. If we decide to give up and use a Rust-like opaque approach, we should
do it comprehensively and not just for `_BitInt`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91364
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
