byval vs. explicitly coded copy

Is there any disadvantage to inserting explicit llvm code in a prolog to copy a
parameter, rather than putting the 'byval' attribute on the formal or indirect call?

I have an IR that, without some significant work, does not make enough information
available at an indirect call site to know whether a copy is needed. (The original
source language knows, it just gets lost at an indirect call.)

It's fine; actually, you'll probably get better code in many cases by avoiding byval. (If you're calling code which uses the C calling convention, you might need to use "byval" to match the calling convention.)

-Eli