hjl.tools added a comment. In D99708#2664076 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D99708#2664076>, @LuoYuanke wrote:
> In D99708#2663989 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D99708#2663989>, @craig.topper > wrote: > >> A user interrupt is different than a regular interrupt right? It doesn't >> make sense that we would change the behavior of the interrupt calling >> convention just because the the user interrupt instructions are enabled. >> That would occur just from passing a -march for a newer CPU wouldn't it? > > Maybe need support another attribute "__attribute__ ((user_interrupt))" for > functions? However this is what gcc does > (https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/8ojTMG6bT). Since there won't be both user interrupt handler and kernel interrupt handler in the source, there is no need for another attribute. We discussed that kernel might need to use UINTR instructions. We decided that kernel could use inline asm statements if needed. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D99708/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D99708 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
