When instantiating an array that has an alignment attribute on it, we
were looking through the array type and only considering the element
type for the resulting alignment. We need to make sure we take the
array's requirements into account too.
llvm-svn: 206317
When calculating the preferred alignment of a type, consider if a alignment
attribute came from a typedef declaration. If one did, do not naturally align
the type.
Patch by Stephan Tolksdorf, with a little tweaking and an additional testcase by me.
llvm-svn: 202088
__attribute__((aligned)). Fixes <rdar://problem/11435441>, a
regression I introduced in r156003. This is the narrow fix; a more
comprehensive fix is coming.
llvm-svn: 156657
unless it's a non-packed field, in which case it can only increase the
alignment. [[align]] effectively works the same way for well-formed code
(because it's ill-formed for [[align]] to decrease alignment ever).
Fixes rdar://problem/8335865
llvm-svn: 116070
- This is designed to make it obvious that %clang_cc1 is a "test variable"
which is substituted. It is '%clang_cc1' instead of '%clang -cc1' because it
can be useful to redefine what gets run as 'clang -cc1' (for example, to set
a default target).
llvm-svn: 91446
"aligned" attribute. Previously, we were skipping over these
attributes when we jumped directly to the canonical type. Now,
ASTContext::getTypeInfo walks through typedefs and other
"non-canonical" types manually, looking for "aligned" attributes on
typedefs.
As part of this change, I moved the GNU-specific logic (such as
determining the alignment of void or of a function pointer) out of the
expression evaluator and into ASTContext::getTypeInfo.
llvm-svn: 70497
Justin Bogner