brandtbucher wrote: Okay. Both of those concerns already apply to the existing 64-bit flavor, right? Would you prefer to see them addressed here, or in a dedicated follow-up?
> For "nest", we can forbid combining it with the preserves_none calling > convention, probably, as long as we can detect it and error out. There's no > reason anyone would combine the two. Makes sense. Where do you think the best place to do this is? > For the base pointer, you also need to worry about the callee-save register > list: I don't think we have code to properly save/restore the base pointer if > it gets clobbered by a call. Okay, this is just adding them to the existing `CSR_*_NoneRegs`, correct? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150106 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
