jroelofs added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D28820#944365, @efriedma wrote:
> > What is the best way to modify the code for this compiler change ? > > Currently, the "interrupt" attribute only has an effect on functions, not > function pointers, so your code won't work the way you want. It's a bug that > we don't emit a warning for this. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35527 > Currently, this warning doesn't have its own warning flag, instead being > lumped under -Wextra. This is also a bug. https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35528 > We don't emit the warning if your code is compiled for a target which doesn't > support floating-point (-mfpu=none or -msoft-float); see > https://reviews.llvm.org/D32918. But otherwise, if you're sure your code is > actually correct, you can turn off the warning with -Wno-extra or something > like that. (The whole thing is kind of awkward because the implementation of > the interrupt attribute in clang is buggy: the frontend lies to the backend > about the calling convention, so the backend can't save/restore VFP registers > correctly.) https://i.imgur.com/BFRoEUO.gif In https://reviews.llvm.org/D28820#944706, @kc.austin2017 wrote: > so is there any plan to make the "interrupt" attribute not just support on > functions? I'll fix these. Give me a few weeks though. https://reviews.llvm.org/D28820 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
