search for: nolongjmp

...es that are only useful to myself. Regarding having several orthogonal attributes vs. things like "safetospeculate": To know a function is safe to speculatively execute, I need at least: 1) readnone (readonly is insufficient, unless I know all accessed pointers are valid) 2) nounwind 3) nolongjmp (I guess?) 4) no undefined behavior. This includes things like "halting" and "no division by zero", but that's not, by far, an exhaustive list. I guess there are several ways to handle (4). Ideally, I agree with you, we'd like a set of orthogonal attributes that, take...

...just readonly), nounwind, halting - and Eris knows what else. Nick, is that too strong for you? I strongly prefer the approach of having orthogonal attributes. There are optimizations that you can do with each of these attributes on their own. In particular I think that readonly+halting+nounwind+nolongjmp is going to be common and I'd feel silly if we had a special case for readnone+halting+nounwind+nolongjmp and thus couldn't optimize the more common case. That said, I'm also going to feel silly if we don't end up with enough attributes to allow isSafeToSpeculate to deduce it,...

...es that are only useful to myself. Regarding having several orthogonal attributes vs. things like "safetospeculate": To know a function is safe to speculatively execute, I need at least: 1) readnone (readonly is insufficient, unless I know all accessed pointers are valid) 2) nounwind 3) nolongjmp (I guess?) 4) no undefined behavior. This includes things like "halting" and "no division by zero", but that's not, by far, an exhaustive list. I guess there are several ways to handle (4). Ideally, I agree with you, we'd like a set of orthogonal attributes that, taken...

...; Regarding having several orthogonal attributes vs. things like > "safetospeculate": > > To know a function is safe to speculatively execute, I need at least: > 1) readnone (readonly is insufficient, unless I know all accessed pointers > are valid) > 2) nounwind > 3) nolongjmp (I guess?) > 4) no undefined behavior. This includes things like "halting" and "no > division by zero", but that's not, by far, an exhaustive list. > > I guess there are several ways to handle (4). > Ideally, I agree with you, we'd like a set of orthogonal...

...al orthogonal attributes vs. things like > "safetospeculate": > > To know a function is safe to speculatively execute, I need at least: > 1) readnone (readonly is insufficient, unless I know all accessed > pointers are valid) > 2) nounwind > 3) nolongjmp (I guess?) > 4) no undefined behavior. This includes things like "halting" and > "no division by zero", but that's not, by far, an exhaustive list. > > I guess there are several ways to handle (4). > Ideally, I agree with you, we'd like a s...

I'm not sure I understand why it's blocked on that, by the way. Even if we can't apply the attribute ourselves, I don't see why we wouldn't expose that ability to frontends. I'm not entirely sure "halting" is the right attribute either, by the way. What I, personally, would like to see is a way to specify a function call is safe to speculatively execute. That

...al orthogonal attributes vs. things like > "safetospeculate": > > To know a function is safe to speculatively execute, I need at least: > 1) readnone (readonly is insufficient, unless I know all accessed > pointers are valid) > 2) nounwind > 3) nolongjmp (I guess?) > 4) no undefined behavior. This includes things like "halting" and > "no division by zero", but that's not, by far, an exhaustive list. > > I guess there are several ways to handle (4). > Ideally, I agree with you, we'd like a s...