rsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGAtomic.cpp:949
case AtomicExpr::AO__opencl_atomic_compare_exchange_strong:
case AtomicExpr::AO__atomic_load_n:
case AtomicExpr::AO__atomic_store_n:
----------------
efriedma wrote:
> Is there any particular reason to expect that the pointer operand to
> __atomic_load_n can't be misaligned? I mean, for most ABIs, integers are
> naturally aligned, but that isn't actually a hard rule.
`__atomic_load_n` is, by definition, guaranteed to never call an unoptimized
atomic library function (see https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Atomic/GCCMM/LIbrary). [I
think the purpose of the `..._n` variants is to provide builtins that
libatomic's unoptimized library functions can use and have a guarantee that
they will not be recursively re-entered.]
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D51817
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
