Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Use ClassLayout::AreCompatible in fgMorphCanUseLclFldForCopy - #69642
Use ClassLayout::AreCompatible in fgMorphCanUseLclFldForCopy#69642jakobbotsch wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
ghost
commented
May 21, 2022
Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT Issue DetailsI was looking at removing the quirk in All credit goes to @SingleAccretion for being able to make this change.
|
jakobbotsch
commented
May 21, 2022
I believe the main benefit here is when we have instantiated generic structs that differ in exact types and __Canon (this happens frequently due to inlining). |
| // TODO-PhysicalVN: with the physical VN scheme, this method is no longer needed. | ||
| // True if the second local is valid and has a layout compatible with the first local. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The TODO should stay or the whole method deleted (what #68986 does).
There is no reason we cannot use LCL_FLD<lcl> in a construct such as the following:
lcl.StructField=promotedLocal;There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, I have not noticed that #68986 removes this, I will just leave it for that PR then.
There is no reason we cannot use LCL_FLD in a construct such as the following:
I see, makes sense. My main worry here was about dropping GC ness during the copy, but I guess the alternatives do not do anything different in that regard.
I was looking at removing the quirk in
impPopCallArgsand tracked the positive diffs down to this.All credit goes to @SingleAccretion for being able to make this change.