efriedma accepted this revision. efriedma added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM ================ Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGAtomic.cpp:949 case AtomicExpr::AO__opencl_atomic_compare_exchange_strong: case AtomicExpr::AO__atomic_load_n: case AtomicExpr::AO__atomic_store_n: ---------------- rsmith wrote: > efriedma wrote: > > Is there any particular reason to expect that the pointer operand to > > __atomic_load_n can't be misaligned? I mean, for most ABIs, integers are > > naturally aligned, but that isn't actually a hard rule. > `__atomic_load_n` is, by definition, guaranteed to never call an unoptimized > atomic library function (see https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Atomic/GCCMM/LIbrary). > [I think the purpose of the `..._n` variants is to provide builtins that > libatomic's unoptimized library functions can use and have a guarantee that > they will not be recursively re-entered.] Oh, okay, makes sense. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D51817 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits