rjmccall added a comment. Patch looks basically okay to me, although I'll second Richard's concern that we shouldn't absent-mindedly start producing overloaded `memcpy`s for ordinary `__builtin_memcpy`.
================ Comment at: clang/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:2446 +order in which they occur (and in which they are observable) can only be +guaranteed using appropriate fences around the function call. Element size must +therefore be a lock-free size for the target architecture. It is a runtime ---------------- "*The* element size must..." But I would suggest using "access size" consistently rather than "element size". Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D79279/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D79279 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
