rnk added a comment. In D84225#3304189 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84225#3304189>, @pengfei wrote:
> It's not a workaround. We do need to avoid the merging sometime. For example, > given we have 2 branches begin with inline asm of `endbr`. We have to use > `nomerge` to stop them been merged out of the branches. `sideeffect` doesn't > help with that. That doesn't sound sufficient to ensure that `endbr` will be the first instruction in that basic block, which I'm guessing is a requirement. PHI nodes might cause register copies / spills to appear before `endbr`, and instrumentation passes typically insert code at the top of basic blocks. It sounds like we might need a more complete solution for tracking indirect branch target blocks. Maybe `indirectbr` and basic block addresses already feed into this, but I'm out of my depth here. Anyway, I don't want to make a value judgment here. I'm in favor of this change. We should allow users to apply `nomerge` to inline asm, whether it is a workaround or not. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D84225/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D84225 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
