gulfem marked an inline comment as done.
gulfem added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td:3909
+The ``leaf`` attribute is used as a compiler hint to improve dataflow analysis
in library functions.
+Functions marked as ``leaf`` attribute are not allowed to enter their caller's
translation unit.
+Therefore, they cannot use or modify any data that does not escape the current
compilation unit.
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> gulfem wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > as leaf -> with the leaf
> > >
> > > I'm not certain how to interpret that functions are not allowed to enter
> > > their caller's translation unit. I sort of read that as leaf functions
> > > are not allowed to call (or otherwise jump) out of the translation unit
> > > in which they're defined -- is that about right?
> > I think the description is a little confusing.
> > As far as I understand, leaf functions can actually call or jump out the
> > the translation unit that they are defined ("Leaf functions might still
> > call functions from other compilation units").
> > The manual refers caller function's translation unit as **current
> > translation** unit.
> > "Calls to external functions with this attribute must return to the current
> > compilation unit only by return or by exception handling. In particular, a
> > leaf function is not allowed to invoke callback functions passed to it from
> > the current compilation unit, directly call functions exported by the unit,
> > or longjmp into the unit."
> > My interpretation of this statement is that a function marked with a leaf
> > attribute can only return to its caller translation unit by a return or an
> > exception, but it cannot enter into callers translation unit by invoking a
> > callback function.
> > Does that make sense?
> >
> >
> Ah, thank you for the explanation! How about: `Functions marked with the
> ''leaf'' attribute are not allowed to jump back into the caller's translation
> unit, whether through invoking a callback function, a direct external
> function call, use of 'longjmp', or other means.`?
>
> Is this property transitive? e.g.,
> ```
> // TU1.c
> void func(void) {
> leaf();
> }
>
> void bar(void) {}
>
> // TU2.c
> __attribute__((leaf)) void leaf(void) {
> baz(); // Is this not allowed?
> }
>
> // TU3.c
> void baz(void) {
> bar();
> }
> ```
> The "directly call functions exported by the unit" makes me think the above
> code is fine but it could also be that "direct" in this case means "through a
> function designator rather than a function pointer".
I like your description, and I changed the doc that incorporates your feedback.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D90275/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D90275
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
