rnk added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20352#477084, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> No, I'm not. I am worried about how this conflicts with another in-flight > patch for supporting MS hotpatchable functions since it seems these two > attributes do roughly the same thing. I'd like to understand how these two > user-facing attributes will not be confusing to users, what should happen if > both attributes wind up on a function, etc. I am hoping that we can wind up > with only one attribute that covers both cases, if possible. From a user perspective, I would definitely want to keep these attributes separate. It's only possible to completely replace an MS hotpatchable function, whereas XRay allows you to instrument function entry and exit with low overhead. You can achieve the same effect as XRay with MS hotpatchable prologues and a full trampoline with a stack frame, but probably not at the same runtime cost. They really are suited for different tasks. http://reviews.llvm.org/D20352 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
