Fix layout flags for types that have oddly sized primitive type fields (#58435) #235
Conversation
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
kpamnany
force-pushed
the
kp-backport-58435
branch
from
978b81f to
7222d04
Compare
kpamnany
force-pushed
the
kp-backport-58435
branch
from
7222d04 to
c3ac147
Compare
Drvi
approved these changes
May 20, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
PR Description
Manually backported --
Base.datatype_isbitsegalisn't present on 1.10.This is caused because for LLVMs sake we have to say that the oddly typed field is smaller than it actually is. (I wonder if we could represent it as an iN field in a struct and have it work but the result would be the same for now)
Checklist
Requirements for merging:
port-to-*labels that don't apply.