necto wrote: I recommend reviewing by commit:
[The CI run](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/actions/runs/40871020864/job/123437863839) on test-only commit proves that the limitation was there before the PR. The next commit fixes it as demonstrated by the change in the tests. I went for a minimal-scope change disabling the `restrict`-sensitivity only in MSVC context. However, I am not sure honoring `restrict` is worth it: 1. There might be other libc implementation that do not apply this qualfier and they will suffer the same FNs. 2. Keeping track of `restricts` introduces quite a bunch of complexity (which I increased by adding an exception for UCRT). 3. It is hard to imagine the case where it would prevent a FP: function name and all arguments match, except for the `restrict` keyword (Note that according to C11 standard the `restrict` qualifier does not change the type compatibility). I would be happy to simplify the code here and always ignore `restrict` for stdlib function summaries. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/236747 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
