================
@@ -1759,20 +1759,29 @@ void
CodeGenFunction::emitZeroOrPatternForAutoVarInit(QualType type,
const VarDecl &D,
Address Loc) {
auto trivialAutoVarInit = getContext().getLangOpts().getTrivialAutoVarInit();
+ auto trivialAutoVarInitSizeBound =
+ getContext().getLangOpts().TrivialAutoVarInitSizeBound;
CharUnits Size = getContext().getTypeSizeInChars(type);
bool isVolatile = type.isVolatileQualified();
if (!Size.isZero()) {
+ auto allocSize =
CGM.getDataLayout().getTypeAllocSize(Loc.getElementType());
----------------
haopliu wrote:
The problem of `emitStoresForConstant` is that it may split struct/array
variables to a handful of stores, which would mess up the size filtering (e.g.,
difficult to debug). What do you think?
> what if we have a large array of structs with a few uninitialized fields.
Initializing the rest will cost us anyway about the same.
(Correct me if I'm wrong) While emitting the auto-init, clang has no idea how
each filed/element is initialized. It's difficult to distinguish these two
cases in `CGDecl.cpp`:
- A large array of structs with all fields uninitialized.
- A large array of structs with a few field uninitialized.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74777
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
