================
@@ -149,6 +149,57 @@ RValue CIRGenFunction::emitBuiltinExpr(const GlobalDecl
&gd, unsigned builtinID,
emitVAEnd(emitVAListRef(e->getArg(0)).getPointer());
return {};
+ case Builtin::BIalloca:
+ case Builtin::BI_alloca:
+ case Builtin::BI__builtin_alloca_uninitialized:
+ case Builtin::BI__builtin_alloca: {
+ // Get alloca size input
+ mlir::Value size = emitScalarExpr(e->getArg(0));
+
+ // The alignment of the alloca should correspond to __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__.
+ const TargetInfo &TI = getContext().getTargetInfo();
+ const CharUnits SuitableAlignmentInBytes =
+ getContext().toCharUnitsFromBits(TI.getSuitableAlign());
+
+ // Emit the alloca op with type `u8 *` to match the semantics of
+ // `llvm.alloca`. We later bitcast the type to `void *` to match the
+ // semantics of C/C++
+ // FIXME(cir): It may make sense to allow AllocaOp of type `u8` to return a
+ // pointer of type `void *`. This will require a change to the allocaOp
+ // verifier.
+ auto allocaAddr = builder.createAlloca(
+ getLoc(e->getSourceRange()), builder.getUInt8PtrTy(),
+ builder.getUInt8Ty(), "bi_alloca", SuitableAlignmentInBytes, size);
----------------
andykaylor wrote:
Is this a problem if there are multiple "bi_alloca" values in the same function?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157116
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
