kpn added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/include/llvm/IR/IRBuilder.h:262
Function *F = BB->getParent();
- if (!F->hasFnAttribute(Attribute::StrictFP)) {
+ if (F && !F->hasFnAttribute(Attribute::StrictFP)) {
F->addFnAttr(Attribute::StrictFP);
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
> kpn wrote:
> > This looks reasonable to me.
> >
> > It smells like there's a larger strictfp IRBuilder issue, but that's not an
> > issue for this patch here. The larger issue won't be hit since the new
> > options affect the entire compilation. It therefore shouldn't block this
> > patch.
> Does IRBuilder actually support inserting into an unparented basic block? I
> feel like this is exposing a much more serious mis-use of IRBuilder.
I suspect you are correct. If we let this "F && " change go in we'll have a
situation where whether or not a block is currently in a function when a
function call is emitted will affect whether or not the eventual function
definition gets the strictfp attribute. That seems like an unfortunate
inconsistency.
I'm still looking into it. I hope to have an IRBuilder review up today or
tomorrow.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D62731/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D62731
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
