| Issue |
159731
|
| Summary |
[CIR] Handling of ABI relevant type information
|
| Labels |
question,
ClangIR
|
| Assignees |
|
| Reporter |
nikic
|
cc @mmha Thanks for your talk yesterday!
I'm trying to get a handle on how ClangIR handles ABI relevant type information. What I originally wanted to figure out is how `__int128` and `_BitInt(128)` are distinguished (which have different alignment), given that integer types are represented using only signedness and bit width: https://clang.godbolt.org/z/zGK5shafz
It turns out that the type representation is actually much lower level than I thought, and seems to correspond more to the lowered LLVM IR type (including padding fillers) rather than the original C type. However, I don't believe it is possible to perform correct calling convention lowering on such a low-level representation.
It seems like calling convention lowering is currently not implemented (in this example the structs get passed as LLVM structs), but I'm curious what the plan for handling this in the future is. Is the type system going to become higher level?
![]()
_______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
