================
@@ -515,5 +515,35 @@ def BitfieldInfoAttr : CIR_Attr<"BitfieldInfo",
"bitfield_info"> {
];
}
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+// AddressPointAttr
+//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
+
+def AddressPointAttr : CIR_Attr<"AddressPoint", "address_point"> {
----------------
bcardosolopes wrote:
> Do we have any consensus on how this should be handled?
We probably agree it should be easy to read / informative for passes?
> I've left the attribute, based on supposition of future usefulness, but I'm
> not opposed to separate attributes as @xlauko suggests.
SGTM - I'm not particularly tied to whether this is encoded directly in the op
with pretty printing (e.g. `index = ...`, etc) or via an attribute wrapper.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/148730
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
