-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.3k
[profcheck] Exclude naked, asm-only functions from profcheck
#168447
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
mtrofin
merged 1 commit into
main
from
users/mtrofin/11-17-_profcheck_exclude_naked_functions_from_profcheck
Nov 20, 2025
+29
−0
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ | ||
| ; RUN: opt -passes=prof-inject %s -S -o - | FileCheck %s | ||
| ; RUN: opt -passes=prof-verify %s --disable-output | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| define void @bar(i1 %c) #0 { | ||
| ret void | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| attributes #0 = { naked } | ||
| ; CHECK-NOT: !prof |
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would just check for the attribute, it's invalid to have anything other than asm in a naked function.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I thought so too initially, but then (1) read https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html which just says
...which is more permissive; and (2) couldn't find any check in
Verifier.cppthat's more thanMaybe there was a subsequent discussion but no doc/verifier update? (Happy to do those separately)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's just saying that some targets might accept more than asm (which I'm not sure is even true). Even if true, that still doesn't necessarily mean that it's valid to inline.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It doesn't sound like the extra checks hurt, and they might catch something weird some day.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll land with the expanded check, since the equivalence naked <-> asm only or other implications isn't clear. Easy to evolve later.