bcardosolopes wrote: Thanks for the fast reply @ChuanqiXu9
> I remember that there is a defect that we may place the GRO on the coroutine > frame. Can you point me to such defect? I had no luck searching for it. > And my instinct reaction is that would this patch be covered by forcing GRO > to not live on the coroutine frame? How do you suggest we do so? Even if we teach the optimizers to not touch the GRO (e.g. `-O0`) there's still a correctness issue. The generated code is still wrong, given that currently, the lifetime of `__coro_gro` outlives the `__promise`, but accessing the proxy for delayed conversion might still depend on the promise. Also, what do you mean by "patch be covered"? I'm confused. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66706 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
