yuxuanchen1997 wrote:

Thanks for the feedback. This patch is the first iteration to model this idea 
as quickly as I can. In general I agree with your comments

> * I feel the name containing `concurrency` is not proper

The name is bikesheddable as always. I was also thinking around the line of 
`[[clang::coro_inplace_awaitable_task]]`.

> * Every time we add or change IR related to coroutines, we need to update 
> https://llvm.org/docs/Coroutines.html. So that we can understand the 
> semantics of the proposed `llvm.coro.safe.elide` much easier.

Will do once we agree on a design. 

> * I'd like to add a new effect to the attribute to always inline (or an 
> inline hint) every such callee function. Note that this won't be part of 
> semantics but the implementation details.

This is a good suggestion for the scope of another PR. 

> * What I prefer is to add a middle end function attribute (must-coro-elide) 
> and apply this attribute and (always inline attribute) to the calls

Do you mean the caller or the callee? I think both, right? 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94693
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to