llvm dev - Oct 2015 - Changing the libc calling convention

I have been searching for a way to change the default calling convention
used for library calls in Clang/LLVM. Although I can see a way to change
the calling convention for compiler-rt functions, there does not appear
to be a mechanism to achieve this for libc library calls.

I have tried a couple of solution:

I tried to change the calling convention in the declarations in the
library. For some library functions, these declarations appear to
conflict with the implicit declaration known to Clang, and I couldn't
find an obvious means for a target to override this. Another problem
with this approach was that the user could provide their own
declarations without a calling convention.

I also tried changing the calling convention in LLVM, by adding a hook
to TargetLibraryInfo to let the target override it. This worked for
trivial cases, but not for function pointers and a couple of other edge
cases.

I can probably make either solution work for my use case, but I am
curious if there is an obvious solution I am missing.

Best regards,
Edward Jones

On 6 Oct 2015, at 10:27, Ed Jones via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> Although I can see a way to change
> the calling convention for compiler-rt functions, there does not appear
> to be a mechanism to achieve this for libc library calls.
Can you clarify what you mean by ‘libc’ in this context?  Do you mean solely
functions that are part of the C standard (which may be in libc, libm, or some
other support library), or functions that are actually in a specific library?

David

Apologies, I mean all functions which are part of the C standard, not
simply those which appear in libc.

Best regards,
Edward Jones

On 06/10/15 10:39, David Chisnall wrote:
> On 6 Oct 2015, at 10:27, Ed Jones via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> Although I can see a way to change
>> the calling convention for compiler-rt functions, there does not appear
>> to be a mechanism to achieve this for libc library calls.
> 
> Can you clarify what you mean by ‘libc’ in this context?  Do you mean
solely functions that are part of the C standard (which may be in libc, libm, or
some other support library), or functions that are actually in a specific
library?
> 
> David
>