Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "c5c0f8e4".
2017 Nov 11
2
RFC: We need to explicitly state that some functions are reserved by LLVM
...lenge is that you’ll need a list of “known builtins” that
> internalize can use, that doesn’t seem like a bad thing though.
>
> -Chris
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171111/c5c0f8e4/attachment.html>
2017 Nov 11
5
RFC: We need to explicitly state that some functions are reserved by LLVM
Trying to sum-up the approaches that have been discussed, numbered in the
order I saw them:
1) Mangle internal names to avoid collisions.
2) Only optimize library functions when they have external linkage.
3) Switch optimizations to do cloning rather than mutating functions
4) Mark all library functions declared in system headers with some
attribute and key optimizations on this
#1