ChuanqiXu9 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?
To calls. We can add attribute to calls instead of functions. 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
