eugenis added a comment. > Because "expect_noreturn" calls are allowed to return, the compiler must > behave as they could. In particular, this means that unpoisoning the stack > before expect_noreturn calls (given the current semantics) is premature.
I don't think that's true. A hypothetical function maybe_longjmp(jmp_buf env) that checks an opaque condition needs stack unpoisoning before the call, in the absense of a better solution. One possible optimization that I can think of is splitting code after the call into a separate basic block and marking it as cold. Admittedly, that's unlikely to have big impact in practice. I'd guess that [[expect_noreturn]] calls are typically not very hot in the first place. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56624/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56624 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
