dblaikie added a comment.
Like the backend patch, should/could this be broken up into separate patches
for the different places/features that have alignment?
(probably just passing zero for alignment in general could be a simple cleanup
patch to start, if it's otherwise unused)
================
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp:609
@@ -609,3 +608,3 @@
uint64_t Size = CGM.getContext().getTypeSize(Ty);
- uint64_t Align = CGM.getContext().getTypeAlign(Ty);
+ uint64_t Align = 0;
return DBuilder.createBasicType("complex", Size, Align, Encoding);
----------------
Maybe add a comment here about why we're specifying zero alignment (or possibly
change the API to not take an alignment at all so we don't have to explain it?)
(similarly for other cases where the alignment is just hardcoded to zero)
================
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp:3691
@@ -3635,1 +3690,3 @@
+ if (D->hasAttr<AlignedAttr>())
+ AlignInBits = D->getMaxAlignment();
StringRef DeclName, LinkageName;
----------------
is max alignment the right thing here? Should it be min alignment?
(is alignment in bits the desired thing across all of this too? It looked like
in the backend patch there was some division by CHAR_BITS, etc?)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24426
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
