================
Comment at: include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:6881
@@ +6880,3 @@
+  "the newer semantics are provided here">,
+  InGroup<DiagGroup<"gcc-intrinsic-semantics-changed">>;
+
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> I think you should pick a warning flag name that is specific to this 
> particular change. We'd never want to put two different semantic changes in 
> the same warning group, because we would want users to be able to turn off 
> one of them without turning off the other.
Makes sense. I'll make it sync-fetch-and-nand-semantics-changed.

================
Comment at: test/CodeGen/Atomics.c:168-183
@@ -149,1 +167,18 @@
 
+  sc = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&sc, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                        // CHECK: xor
+  uc = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&uc, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                        // CHECK: xor
+  ss = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&ss, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                        // CHECK: xor
+  us = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&us, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                        // CHECK: xor
+  si = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&si, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                        // CHECK: xor
+  ui = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&ui, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                        // CHECK: xor
+  sll = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&sll, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                          // CHECK: xor
+  ull = __sync_nand_and_fetch (&ull, uc); // CHECK: atomicrmw nand
+                                          // CHECK: xor
+
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> Please also check for the `and` instruction here.
Done.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D5429



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to