hfinkel added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39079#905371, @tmsriram wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39079#905353, @hfinkel wrote: > > > Noting that, as @vit9696 pointed out in https://reviews.llvm.org/D38554, > > this does not suppress uses of the PLT that occur from > > backend/optimizer-generated functions (e.g., calls into compiler-rt and > > similar). > > > Can I work on this as a follow-up? I have no objection to that, although adding a mechanism to fix this (which I imagine would be an attribute tied to the caller, not the callee, would probably end up replacing this mechanism). https://reviews.llvm.org/D39079 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
