efriedma-quic wrote:
There are two ways we could analyze, this, I think:
- EmitVAArg is doing something which disagrees with the classification done by
classifyArgumentType, so that's a bug in EmitVAArg.
- classifyArgumentType is returning a malformed value; EmitVAArg should assert
that it
CoTinker wrote:
Inconsistency here is inevitable.
Such struct `SuperEmpty { struct{ int a[0];} b;}` in c++ mode can not be
ignored in i386 for that c++ fields are never empty, and its TypeInfo.Width =
TypeInfo.Align = 0.
efriedma-quic wrote:
If you implement #86075 like I suggested, the inconsistency here also goes
away, I think: if va_arg queries classifyArgumentType, you get the same result
as argument lowering, so clang becomes self-consistent. (Whether that's
gcc-compatible is a different question...)
https://github.com/CoTinker edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/86388
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
