rjmccall added a comment.
You need to add user docs for these builtins.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td:8917
+
+def err_atomic_type_must_be_lock_free : Error<"_Atomic type must always be
lock-free, %0 isn't">;
+
----------------
I don't know why you're adding a bunch of new diagnostics about _Atomic.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGBuiltin.cpp:636
+ return ArgTy->castAs<clang::PointerType>()->getPointeeType();
+}
+
----------------
Since arrays are handled separately now, this is just `getPointeeType()`, but I
don't know why you need to support ObjC object pointer types here at all.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExpr.cpp:1070
// We allow this with ObjC object pointers because of fragile ABIs.
- assert(E->getType()->isPointerType() ||
+ assert(E->getType()->isPointerType() || E->getType()->isArrayType() ||
E->getType()->isObjCObjectPointerType());
----------------
Why arrays?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:5446
+ return ExprError();
+ clang::Expr *SrcOp = SrcPtr.get();
+
----------------
Do you ever write these back into the call?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:5468
+ bool isAtomic = (DstTy && DstValTy->isAtomicType()) ||
+ (SrcTy && SrcValTy->isAtomicType());
+
----------------
You already know that DstTy and SrcTy are non-null here.
Why do you need to support atomic types for these operations anyway? It just
seems treacherous and unnecessary.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D79279/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D79279
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
