================
@@ -471,42 +518,123 @@ uint16_t __xray_register_event_type(
}
XRayPatchingStatus __xray_patch() XRAY_NEVER_INSTRUMENT {
- return controlPatching(true);
+ XRayPatchingStatus CombinedStatus{SUCCESS};
----------------
androm3da wrote:
> We could add an assertion to make this assumption explicit. What do you think?
Yeah - good idea, if it's easily done.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90959
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
