Allow direct dispatch for the ObjFW runtime #126382
Conversation
|
Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project! This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified. If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page. If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers. If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide. You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums. |
llvmbot
added
clang
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-codegen @llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: Jonathan Schleifer (Midar) ChangesThere was no reason for it to ever be disabled. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126382.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/clang/include/clang/Basic/ObjCRuntime.h b/clang/include/clang/Basic/ObjCRuntime.h
index 1ccf60f0b7bee7..df42b438986111 100644
--- a/clang/include/clang/Basic/ObjCRuntime.h
+++ b/clang/include/clang/Basic/ObjCRuntime.h
@@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ class ObjCRuntime {
case GCC: return false;
case GNUstep:
return (getVersion() >= VersionTuple(2, 2));
- case ObjFW: return false;
+ case ObjFW: return true;
}
llvm_unreachable("bad kind");
}
|
|
Would @rjmccall be the appropriate reviewer? |
|
Also, would it be possible to get this into 20.1? |
|
Actually, I realized this needs more work, as GenerateDirectMethodPrologue needs to be implemented. Moving to draft. |
Midar
changed the title
|
Copied the necessary parts from CGObjCMac to just ObjFW, as GNUstep decided to do it very differently. Theoretically, the same could be done for the GCC runtime. Should it? |
Midar
changed the title
|
@rjmccall @davidchisnall @ahatanak Could any of you have a look, please? I'd think this is rather straightforward. |
| const ObjCInterfaceDecl *OID = cast<ObjCInterfaceDecl>(CD); | ||
| assert( | ||
| OID && | ||
| "GenerateDirectMethod() should be called with the Class Interface"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
cast is already an asserting cast, so this should just be a comment. But really, if this is reliably true (it's never passed an implementation or a category?), I wonder why it's not expressed in the type of this method.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is straight up copied from CGObjCMac, so I have no idea why it was done this way :)
|
@rjmccall What's required to get this merged now that it has your LGTM? |
|
@Midar Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project! Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR. Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues. How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here. If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again. If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done! |
|
Thanks for merging! Is there a way to get this into 20.1.2? |
|
Thanks, that looks like it'll have to wait for 21. |
4 participants
Allow direct dispatch for the ObjFW runtime