search for: maxatomicpromotewidth

Hi Rafael, As you mentioned in the bug, we should only apply this change when hard-float is set, which it is by default on armv7a, I presume. >From that part of the code, I can infer that by the time "MaxAtomicPromoteWidth = 64;", the variable SoftFloat is not properly set, so a simple "if (!SoftFloat)" won't cut in there. It seems SoftFloat is being set on HandleTargetFeatures() which is a virtual method, probably called indirectly. Do you have a better place to set MaxAtomicInlineWidth = 64? che...

Identified a while before the release, there is an issue with 64-bit atomics on ARM that was making Clang mis-compile a lot of code, including Clang itself. http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15429 Attached is a patch proposed by Benjamin with the corrections to the test. I'm not an expert on how Clang lowers C11 atomics, but the resulting IR seems correct, and after self-hosting Clang

...:59, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > As you mentioned in the bug, we should only apply this change when > hard-float is set, which it is by default on armv7a, I presume. > > From that part of the code, I can infer that by the time > "MaxAtomicPromoteWidth = 64;", the variable SoftFloat is not properly set, > so a simple "if (!SoftFloat)" won't cut in there. It seems SoftFloat is > being set on HandleTargetFeatures() which is a virtual method, probably > called indirectly. Do you have a better place to set MaxAtomicInlineW...