================
@@ -1056,6 +1083,25 @@ void CoroCloner::create() {
// Set up the new entry block.
replaceEntryBlock();
+ // Turn symmetric transfers into musttail calls.
+ for (CallInst *ResumeCall : Shape.SymmetricTransfers) {
+ ResumeCall = cast<CallInst>(VMap[ResumeCall]);
+ ResumeCall->setCallingConv(NewF->getCallingConv());
+ if (TTI.supportsTailCallFor(ResumeCall)) {
+ // FIXME: Could we support symmetric transfer effectively without
+ // musttail?
+ ResumeCall->setTailCallKind(CallInst::TCK_MustTail);
+ }
+
+ // Put a 'ret void' after the call, and split any remaining instructions to
----------------
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
> Also, maybe this would become moot if we address
> https://discourse.llvm.org/t/coro-pre-split-handling-of-the-suspend-edge/75043
> like @jyknight suggested (i.e. not even have the misleading edge)?
But IIRC, it is still possible that we'll have code inserted between
`llvm.coro.await.suspend.{.*}` and `llvm.coro.suspend`, which is the problem
we're discussing.
> Sorry for insisting on this, it's maybe because I got "bitten" before (with
> the suspend), but what other examples do we have where, silently,
> instructions don't get executed after a call?
If I read correctly, @zmodem said he'd like to mention this in the doc or check
it by assertions or verifiers. So it looks consensus to me?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89751
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
