farzonl wrote: > This doesn't seem right. Are we just misusing `DiagnosticInfoUnsupported` > here? The `Function` argument for `DiagnosticInfoWithLocationBase` is clearly > meant to be part of the location (as evidenced by the "in function XYZ" part > of the message). I suspect that we should really be changing the unknown > intrinsic diagnostic to use `DiagnosticInfoGeneric` rather than > `DiagnosticInfoUnsupported`, and we should probably update the other use of > `DiagnosticInfoUnsupported` in `OpLowerer::replaceFunction` to use > `DiagnosticInfoGenericWithLoc` and pass in the parent function of the > `CallInst` rather than the callee.
Thats option 5. we would still want to encode the intrinsic name in the message but if we used `DiagnosticInfoGeneric` the message string and the print would be the same. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136234 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
