1 files changed, 56 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/test/CodeGen/X86/tail-call-attrs.ll b/test/CodeGen/X86/tail-call-attrs.ll
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000..17ebe997c8c1f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/CodeGen/X86/tail-call-attrs.ll
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+; RUN: llc -mtriple=x86_64-apple-darwin -o - %s | FileCheck %s
+
+; Simple case: completely identical returns, even with extensions, shouldn't be
+; a barrier to tail calls.
+declare zeroext i1 @give_bool()
+define zeroext i1 @test_bool() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_bool:
+; CHECK: jmp
+  %call = tail call zeroext i1 @give_bool()
+  ret i1 %call
+}
+
+; Here, there's more zero extension to be done between the call and the return,
+; so a tail call is impossible (well, according to current Clang practice
+; anyway. The AMD64 ABI isn't crystal clear on the matter).
+declare zeroext i32 @give_i32()
+define zeroext i8 @test_i32() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_i32:
+; CHECK: callq _give_i32
+; CHECK: movzbl %al, %eax
+; CHECK: ret
+
+  %call = tail call zeroext i32 @give_i32()
+  %val = trunc i32 %call to i8
+  ret i8 %val
+}
+
+; Here, one function is zeroext and the other is signext. To the extent that
+; these both mean something they are incompatible so no tail call is possible.
+declare zeroext i16 @give_unsigned_i16()
+define signext i16 @test_incompatible_i16() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_incompatible_i16:
+; CHECK: callq _give_unsigned_i16
+; CHECK: cwtl
+; CHECK: ret
+
+  %call = tail call zeroext i16 @give_unsigned_i16()
+  ret i16 %call
+}
+
+declare inreg i32 @give_i32_inreg()
+define i32 @test_inreg_to_normal() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_inreg_to_normal:
+; CHECK: callq _give_i32_inreg
+; CHECK: ret
+  %val = tail call inreg i32 @give_i32_inreg()
+  ret i32 %val
+}
+
+define inreg i32 @test_normal_to_inreg() {
+; CHECK-LABEL: test_normal_to_inreg:
+; CHECK: callq _give_i32
+; CHECK: ret
+  %val = tail call i32 @give_i32()
+  ret i32 %val
+}