lewis-revill added a comment. In D62686#1820816 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62686#1820816>, @apazos wrote:
> Lewis, your latest patch looks good, we just had another run with no new > failures. But we know it will have issues with -g. So I think we should not > merge it yet. Do you have a version of the patch that creates the labels for > the compiler-generated save/restore lib calls, so that this optimization does > not depend on D71593 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71593>? We could merge that > version then, and when D71593 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71593> is accepted, > you just have to rework/remove the label generation part of the patch. I don't expect that would be possible without making changes to generic code anyway. Removing the framesetup flag from the libcalls when generating them would allow labels to be produced, but that would require making modifications to the logic of this patch which relies on the libcalls being annotated as such. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62686/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62686 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
