dblaikie added a comment. In D69970#1745038 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69970#1745038>, @vsk wrote:
> Don't emit declaration subprograms for functions with reserved names. There > may not be much benefit from referencing these functions from call site tags > (e.g. instead of relying on call site info to work out the arguments passed > to __asan_memcpy, the asan runtime could log those arguments instead). > > This fixes a verifier failure: > > inlinable function call in a function with debug info must have a !dbg > location > %134 = call i8* @__asan_memcpy(i8* %agg.tmp2.sroa.0.0..sroa_cast10.i, i8* > %agg.tmp.sroa.0.i.0..sroa_cast, i64 32) > > > @aprantl / @djtodoro, mind taking another look? (my very vague take on this, admittedly having not followed this work in detail, is that this sounds pretty heuristical & not like it's a principled/general solution? But I don't really know much about all this & will leave actual approvals/disapprovals to the other folks who've been reviewing this stuff (& admittedly, as the person who introduced the "inlinable call with no debug location in debug-having function" assertion/failure, it is a bit contextual as to whether a certain call is inlinable, etc)) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69970/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69970 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
