Author: bcraig
Date: Tue Jul 11 18:45:13 2017
New Revision: 307751
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=307751=rev
Log:
Fix unrepresentable enum for clang-cl unstable ABI
When using LIBCXX_ABI_UNSTABLE=YES, clang-cl gave the following warning:
Author: bcraig
Date: Mon May 8 20:34:12 2017
New Revision: 302497
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=302497=rev
Log:
Fix Windows tests when __config_site is present.
Previously, the force includes would complain about a missing _DEBUG symbol.
Now we dump macros before adding the force
Author: bcraig
Date: Mon May 8 20:26:39 2017
New Revision: 302496
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=302496=rev
Log:
Revert "Fix Windows tests when __config_site is present."
It's 2017, and line endings are still an issue.
Modified:
libcxx/trunk/utils/libcxx/test/config.py
Author: bcraig
Date: Mon May 8 08:15:22 2017
New Revision: 302421
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=302421=rev
Log:
Fix Windows tests when __config_site is present.
Previously, the force includes would complain about a missing _DEBUG symbol.
Now we dump macros before adding the force
Author: bcraig
Date: Tue Apr 11 09:06:39 2017
New Revision: 299942
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=299942=rev
Log:
[libc++] Fix unknown pragma warning on MSVC
Modified:
libcxx/trunk/include/limits
Modified: libcxx/trunk/include/limits
URL:
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
Neat! I would have liked to have had this for the Excess Padding Checker.
Currently, the padding checker has a very long diagnostic that recommends a new
order for data members. I think a note (or fixit) would be more appropriate,
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24374#538521, @smeenai wrote:
> @bcraig thanks for pointing me to that diff; there's a lot of nice cleanup
> going on there. Were you planning on updating and following up on it?
>
> I also realized I forgot to adjust `locale_win32.cpp` for
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
This seems related:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D20596
In that (stale) review, I switch away from unique_ptr in general for locale
related operations.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24374
___
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM
Comment at: src/condition_variable.cpp:86
@@ +85,3 @@
+if (tl_ptr.get() == nullptr) {
+tl_ptr.set_pointer(new __thread_struct);
+}
EricWF wrote:
> bcraig wrote:
> > The standard synopsis of notify_all_at_thread_exit
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: src/condition_variable.cpp:86
@@ +85,3 @@
+if (tl_ptr.get() == nullptr) {
+tl_ptr.set_pointer(new __thread_struct);
+}
The standard synopsis of notify_all_at_thread_exit in the standard doesn't have
a
bcraig added a comment.
The "@" will do a ping through phabricator, but a direct email is probably
going to be your best bet at this point.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21803
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21803#530678, @tavianator wrote:
> Ping?
Well, I still think it's fine. Maybe a direct message to @mclow.lists or
@EricWF?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21803
___
cfe-commits mailing list
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279#523449, @alexshap wrote:
> @djasper, @bcraig, @aaron.ballman - many thanks for the comments and
> suggestions,
> please, let me know if you are waiting for any other changes on my side (for
> v0) or if there is anything else i can do
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279#522504, @djasper wrote:
> In the meantime, I don't know whether we should check this in as a
> standalone-tool and then merge into clang-refactor once ready. Ben, what do
> you think?
Well, I don't know how much you should count my
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23719#520969, @rsmith wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23719#520954, @bcraig wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23719#520952, @rsmith wrote:
> >
> > > Are we really guaranteed that the C and C++ compiler behave the same way
> > >
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23719#520953, @smeenai wrote:
> @bcraig: `__STDC_NO_ATOMICS__` wouldn't be defined for pre-C11 compilers
> either, right?
>
> From what I understand of the original code sample, one of the purposes was
> to check for 64-bit atomic support on
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23719#520952, @rsmith wrote:
> Are we really guaranteed that the C and C++ compiler behave the same way
> here? I don't see why that would necessarily be the case.
For libc++, std::atomic is implemented in terms of _Atomic. So as long as
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
I like the rationale here, but can we avoid pulling in headers at all?
You could test _ _STDC_NO_ATOMICS_ _. You could also have some code like
this...
_Atomic int x;
int main() {
x += 1;
return x;
}
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/PaddingChecker.cpp:217
@@ +216,3 @@
+// then large field indices to small field indices
+return std::make_tuple(Align, -Size,
+ Field ?
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM. Thanks for the patch!
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/PaddingChecker.cpp:217
@@ +216,3 @@
+// then large field indices to small field indices
+return std::make_tuple(Align, -Size,
+ Field ?
bcraig added a comment.
I am kind of interested in what the warning message for clang::Sema in
clang/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h looks like. When I last analyzed that file,
there was a bunch of padding. It's a very long class though, so it can stress
the usability of your messages.
bcraig added a comment.
Note: In the future, try to provide more context lines in the patch.
http://llvm.org/docs/Phabricator.html#requesting-a-review-via-the-web-interface
I'm mostly fine with the algorithmic changes. I'm not thrilled with the
formatting of the error message, but I'm not
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279#511187, @omtcyfz wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279#510234, @alexshap wrote:
>
> > > I do think that an automated tool will do a better job of changing field
> > > orderings in a non-breaking way than most people would, mostly
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279#510178, @omtcyfz wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279#510167, @alexshap wrote:
>
> > my point is the following: this tool helps perform some operation (changing
> > the order of fields),
> > if smb decides to do it manually -
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279#509017, @Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> Do we really need standalone tool for this purpose? If I'm not mistaken,
> Static Analyzer already has clang-analyzer-optin.performance.Padding check,
> which is also
Author: bcraig
Date: Mon Aug 1 14:56:39 2016
New Revision: 277373
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=277373=rev
Log:
Adding smart_ptr benchmark
Initial draft here:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22470
... though this is Eric Fiselier's rewrite to fit in with Google
Benchmark.
Added:
bcraig closed this revision.
bcraig added a comment.
committed https://reviews.llvm.org/rL277357: Improve shared_ptr dtor
performance.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22470
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
Author: bcraig
Date: Mon Aug 1 12:51:26 2016
New Revision: 277357
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=277357=rev
Log:
Improve shared_ptr dtor performance
If the last destruction is uncontended, skip the atomic store on
__shared_weak_owners_. This shifts some costs from normal
bcraig added a comment.
I am going to submit the code changes and the tests independently. I'm having
trouble getting cmake to use the right compiler for the libcxx-benchmarks
target.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22470
___
cfe-commits mailing list
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: include/atomic:569
@@ +568,3 @@
+__attribute__ ((__enable_if__(__m == memory_order_release \
+ || __m == memory_order_acq_rel, ""))) \
+__attribute__ ((__unavailable__("memory
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
Comment at: include/atomic:569
@@ +568,3 @@
+__attribute__ ((__enable_if__(__m == memory_order_release \
+ || __m == memory_order_acq_rel, ""))) \
+__attribute__
bcraig updated the summary for this revision.
bcraig updated this revision to Diff 64504.
bcraig added a comment.
Added weak_ptr benchmark, as that's where the cost shifted.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22470
Files:
benchmarks/shared_ptr_create_destroy.cpp
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
Comment at: src/UnwindRegistersRestore.S:325
@@ -324,4 +324,3 @@
DEFINE_LIBUNWIND_PRIVATE_FUNCTION(_ZN9libunwind13Registers_arm20restoreCoreAndJumpToEv)
-#if !defined(__ARM_ARCH_ISA_ARM)
- ldr r2, [r0, #52]
- ldr r3, [r0, #60]
+#if
bcraig created this revision.
bcraig added reviewers: jfb, mclow.lists, EricWF.
bcraig added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
If the last destruction is uncontended, skip the atomic store on
__shared_weak_owners_.
For x86_64, this results in an 8% improvement in shared_ptr ctor+dtor
performance.
Old
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM. As usual, you'll want to get one of the code owner's sign off first
though.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21968
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: test/thread_local_destruction_order.pass.cpp:54
@@ +53,3 @@
+ std::thread{thread_fn}.join();
+
+ thread_local OrderChecker fn_thread_local{2};
tavianator wrote:
> bcraig wrote:
> > In the places where you can, validate
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: CMakeLists.txt:131
@@ -130,2 +130,3 @@
option(LIBCXX_HAS_MUSL_LIBC "Build libc++ with support for the Musl C library"
OFF)
-option(LIBCXX_HAS_PTHREAD_API "Ignore auto-detection and force use of pthread
API" OFF)
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: src/cxa_thread_atexit.cpp:47
@@ +46,3 @@
+// called during the loop.
+if (pthread_setspecific(dtors, ptr) != 0) {
+ abort_message("pthread_setspecific() failed during thread_local
destruction");
The loop
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: CMakeLists.txt:108
@@ -107,2 +107,3 @@
option(LIBUNWIND_ENABLE_CROSS_UNWINDING "Enable cross-platform unwinding
support." OFF)
+option(LIBUNWIND_ENABLE_ARM_WMMX "Enable unwinding support for ARM WMMX
registers." ON)
bcraig added a comment.
Also, can you add test cases for a lot of these things? I don't expect test
cases for the DSO side of things, but a lot of the tricky atexit cases should
be covered.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21803
___
cfe-commits mailing
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: src/cxa_thread_atexit.cpp:47
@@ +46,3 @@
+ void run_dtors(void* ptr) {
+if (pthread_setspecific(dtors, ptr) != 0) {
+ abort_message("pthread_setspecific() failed during thread_local
destruction");
Why are we
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D21803#470564, @joerg wrote:
> On the topic of __cxa_thread_atexit, was it ever specified how it interacts
> with things like thread cancellation?
I don't think it's officially specified anywhere. C++ threads don't have a
cancel method.
bcraig added a comment.
> Hmm, maybe? If other global destructors run after ~DtorListHolder(), and
> they cause a thread_local to be initialized for the first time,
> __cxa_thread_atexit() might be called again. I was thinking that dtors would
> get re-initialized in that case but it appears
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D21803#470060, @tavianator wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D21803#469988, @bcraig wrote:
>
> > You should look at __thread_specific_ptr in libcxx's . It does a
> > lot of these things in order to satisfy the requirements of
> >
bcraig added subscribers: rmaprath, bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
You should look at __thread_specific_ptr in libcxx's . It does a lot
of these things in order to satisfy the requirements of
notify_all_at_thread_exit, set_value_at_thread_exit, and
make_ready_at_thread_exit.
@rmaprath has
bcraig closed this revision.
bcraig added a comment.
Old: 106,657,666
New: 105,346,818
Submitted in r273572
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21229
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
Author: bcraig
Date: Thu Jun 23 10:47:12 2016
New Revision: 273572
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=273572=rev
Log:
[Analyzer] Don't cache report generation ExplodedNodes
During the core analysis, ExplodedNodes are added to the
ExplodedGraph, and those nodes are cached for
bcraig added subscribers: joerg, bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
@joerg. I think this has been fixed in newer versions of NetBSD.
Sure would be nice if someone could fix this on the MUSL side of things.
See https://bugs.musicpd.org/view.php?id=4110 for fun conversations about
mutex,
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM. I don't see anything controversial here. If you want to wait for
@EricWF or @mclow.lists though, that's fine.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21345
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
> Even though they have artificial blocks in order to keep variables locally
> scoped, this gives MSVC's /analyze a headache, because it views main() as
> consuming an enormous amount of stack space (it doesn't reuse stack, at least
>
bcraig created this revision.
bcraig added reviewers: zaks.anna, dcoughlin, jordan_rose.
bcraig added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
During the core analysis, ExplodedNodes are added to the ExplodedGraph, and
those nodes are cached for deduplication purposes.
After core analysis, reports are
bcraig closed this revision.
bcraig added a comment.
Completed: At revision: 272394
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20933
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: bcraig
Date: Fri Jun 10 08:22:13 2016
New Revision: 272394
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=272394=rev
Log:
Preallocate ExplodedNode hash table
Rehashing the ExplodedNode table is very expensive. The hashing
itself is expensive, and the general activity of iterating over the
bcraig added a comment.
I got better valgrind numbers (symbols are important).
Before: 106,131,538
After: 106,657,666
Diff: 526,128 larger.
Note that this is sampled peaks for heap usage. They may not be accurate.
Regardless, the peak usage increased by less than .5%.
bcraig updated this revision to Diff 60177.
bcraig added a comment.
Capping the pre-reserve space
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20933
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/ExplodedGraph.h
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/CoreEngine.cpp
Index: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/CoreEngine.cpp
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20933#452854, @dcoughlin wrote:
> A 6% speed improvement could be a big win! Do we have a sense of what the
> expected increased memory cost (as a % of average use over the lifetime of
> the process) is? My guess is it would be relatively
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20933#452352, @zaks.anna wrote:
> > For the pile of LLVM projects that I am currently building (llvm, clang,
> > libcxx, libcxxabi), 18.9% of all analyzed
>
> > functions hit the maximum step count. For the previously discussed large
> > .C
bcraig updated this revision to Diff 59950.
bcraig added a comment.
Uploading more context.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20933
Files:
include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/ExplodedGraph.h
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/CoreEngine.cpp
Index: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/CoreEngine.cpp
bcraig added a comment.
tldr; I'm going to recommend we stick with the current algorithm, but I only
have partial data to back that up.
For the pile of LLVM projects that I am currently building (llvm, clang,
libcxx, libcxxabi), 18.9% of all analyzed functions hit the maximum step count.
For
bcraig added a comment.
I'll try to get those stats. My suspicion is that it is highly language /
projects specific. Specifically, I suspect that C (and maybe ObjC?) won't hit
the analysis limit often, but that C++ will hit the limit frequently because of
the large number of inline
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20933#447608, @zaks.anna wrote:
> Does FoldingSet already have reserve? (I do not see it.)
The reserve call would be new. I'm attempting to add it in this llvm review:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20930
> My understanding is that you propose
bcraig created this revision.
bcraig added reviewers: zaks.anna, krememek, jordan_rose.
bcraig added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
This depends on http://reviews.llvm.org/D20930
Rehashing the ExplodedNode table is very expensive. The hashing itself is
expensive, and the general activity of
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: include/__threading_support:201
@@ +200,3 @@
+# if !defined(__has_include) || __has_include(<__static_threading>)
+#include<__static_threading>
+# else
This #include deserves a comment. Some perplexed developer is
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: include/__threading_support:187
@@ +186,3 @@
+{
+std::terminate();
+}
rmaprath wrote:
> bcraig wrote:
> > Why does this need to go in threading_support? Seems like this is mostly
> > orthogonal to threading.
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: include/__threading_support:187
@@ +186,3 @@
+{
+std::terminate();
+}
Why does this need to go in threading_support? Seems like this is mostly
orthogonal to threading. libcxxabi seems like the better place to hold
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D16545#444869, @bcraig wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D16545#444854, @rmaprath wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you forgot to commit that file?
>
>
> Hrm, you're right, it didn't go in. I'll get it in tomorrow morning.
Should be in now. r271388.
Author: bcraig
Date: Wed Jun 1 07:50:30 2016
New Revision: 271388
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=271388=rev
Log:
Missed part of D16545 (static lib testing)
http://reviews.llvm.org/D16545
Modified:
libcxxabi/trunk/CMakeLists.txt
Modified: libcxxabi/trunk/CMakeLists.txt
URL:
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D16545#444854, @rmaprath wrote:
> Hmmm, it looks like part of this patch didn't go in? I cannot see the changes
> in the `libcxxabi/CMakeLists.txt` file in the repo.
>
> I was hoping this would enable me to run the `libc++abi` tests on in-tree
bcraig added subscribers: mclow.lists, bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM. Add @mclow.lists as a reviewer.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20730
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20320#442246, @rmaprath wrote:
> Do you know if there are clang / llvm passes that attempts to achieve some
> sort of stack compaction? I couldn't find much.
I'm not sure if it belongs to its own pass, or if it is part of another pass,
but
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM. You may want to wait on Marshall's approval though. Thanks for being
patient with me, and thanks for the patch!
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20334
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM. Probably want a "LGTM" from at least one other person though.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20677#441085, @rmaprath wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20677#441061, @jroelofs wrote:
>
> > This is the canonical reference for the Itanium ABI:
> >
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: src/cxa_aux_runtime.cpp:19-24
@@ -18,4 +18,8 @@
extern "C" {
_LIBCXXABI_FUNC_VIS LIBCXXABI_NORETURN void __cxa_bad_cast(void) {
+#ifndef _LIBCXXABI_NO_EXCEPTIONS
throw std::bad_cast();
+#else
+ std::terminate();
+#endif
}
bcraig added a comment.
So I definitely see a problem, and I think your fix is a reasonable solution to
that problem. I'm still unclear on how that caused the ASAN error though.
Here's my understanding of the current problem...
The initial buffer for strstreambuf is often 4096 ( _strstream>
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: CMakeLists.txt:359
@@ -350,2 +358,3 @@
else()
- add_subdirectory(test)
+ # libc++abi tests are mostly exceptions related. The only reason we want to
+ # build libc++abi without exceptions is to support the -fno-exceptions libc++
bcraig added a comment.
r270735
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20573
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
bcraig closed this revision.
bcraig added a comment.
r270732
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20574
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: bcraig
Date: Wed May 25 12:40:09 2016
New Revision: 270735
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=270735=rev
Log:
[libcxx] Allow explicit pthread opt-in
The existing pthread detection code in __config is pretty good for
common operating systems. It doesn't allow cmake-time choices
Author: bcraig
Date: Wed May 25 12:37:38 2016
New Revision: 270732
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=270732=rev
Log:
Allow explicit pthread opt-in
When building libcxxabi in tree (i.e. in llvm/projects/libcxxabi,
along with llvm/projects/libcxx), libcxx's config_site.in doesn't
get
bcraig added a comment.
LGTM. You probably need to get an approval from someone else though, as I
haven't really established myself in the libunwind code base.
As a side note... one of these days clang / llvm stack compaction may actually
work reasonably well, and tricks like this won't be
bcraig added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20334#438052, @ahatanak wrote:
> My understanding is that typically std::ends is explicitly appended to
> null-terminate the stream buffer. The test case in the example does that.
>
> http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/io/ostrstream/str
Doh!
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: include/__threading_support:201
@@ +200,3 @@
+// Mutex
+#define _LIBCPP_MUTEX_INITIALIZER nullptr
+struct __libcpp_platform_mutex_t;
rmaprath wrote:
> rmaprath wrote:
> > bcraig wrote:
> > > rmaprath wrote:
> > > > bcraig
bcraig marked 2 inline comments as done.
bcraig added a comment.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20573
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
bcraig updated this revision to Diff 58320.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20573
Files:
CMakeLists.txt
include/__config
include/__config_site.in
include/__threading_support
Index: include/__threading_support
===
---
bcraig marked an inline comment as done.
bcraig added a comment.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20574
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
bcraig updated this revision to Diff 58317.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20574
Files:
CMakeLists.txt
Index: CMakeLists.txt
===
--- CMakeLists.txt
+++ CMakeLists.txt
@@ -113,6 +113,7 @@
option(LIBCXXABI_ENABLE_WERROR "Fail and stop
bcraig created this revision.
bcraig added reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF, joerg, jroelofs.
bcraig added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
Herald added a subscriber: jfb.
This patch cleans up libcxx's usage of newlocale, freelocale, uselocale, and
locale_t.
First, libcxx no longer defines the posix
bcraig added inline comments.
Comment at: include/__threading_support:201
@@ +200,3 @@
+// Mutex
+#define _LIBCPP_MUTEX_INITIALIZER nullptr
+struct __libcpp_platform_mutex_t;
rmaprath wrote:
> bcraig wrote:
> > I'm not sure I like taking the freedom to define
bcraig added a subscriber: bcraig.
bcraig added a comment.
I don't believe this is a libcxx bug, but it is a bug in the test code.
oss.str(); isn't required to return a null terminated string. std::cout <<
(char *) requires a null terminated string though.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20334
bcraig added a comment.
Note: You'll want to look at http://reviews.llvm.org/D20573, as there will be
confilicts for whoever submits second.
Comment at: include/__threading_support:201
@@ +200,3 @@
+// Mutex
+#define _LIBCPP_MUTEX_INITIALIZER nullptr
+struct
bcraig created this revision.
bcraig added reviewers: rmaprath, mclow.lists, EricWF.
bcraig added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
Companion to http://reviews.llvm.org/D20573
When building libcxxabi in tree (i.e. in llvm/projects/libcxxabi, along with
llvm/projects/libcxx), libcxx's __config_site.in
bcraig created this revision.
bcraig added reviewers: rmaprath, mclow.lists, EricWF.
bcraig added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
The existing pthread detection code in __config is pretty good for common
operating systems. It doesn't allow cmake-time choices to be made for uncommon
operating
bcraig closed this revision.
bcraig added a comment.
r270213
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17416
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: bcraig
Date: Fri May 20 07:58:41 2016
New Revision: 270213
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=270213=rev
Log:
Reorganize locale extension fallbacks. NFCI
The various _l locale extension functions originate from very
different places. Some come from POSIX, some are BSD
bcraig added a comment.
I'll be submitting this Friday morning, barring any objections (I'm out of the
office the next couple of days).
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17416
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
bcraig updated this revision to Diff 57521.
bcraig marked 2 inline comments as done.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17416
Files:
include/support/android/locale_bionic.h
include/support/newlib/xlocale.h
include/support/xlocale/__posix_l_fallback.h
include/support/xlocale/__strtonum_fallback.h
bcraig updated this revision to Diff 57520.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17416
Files:
include/support/android/locale_bionic.h
include/support/newlib/xlocale.h
include/support/xlocale/__posix_l_fallback.h
include/support/xlocale/__strtonum_fallback.h
include/support/xlocale/xlocale.h
bcraig added a comment.
r268732
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19936
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: bcraig
Date: Fri May 6 08:29:46 2016
New Revision: 268732
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=268732=rev
Log:
Adding omitted column to invalid loc diagnostic.
note_fe_backend_invalid_loc expects three arguments (file, line, column),
and will assert when only given two. The
bcraig created this revision.
bcraig added reviewers: olista01, t.p.northover.
bcraig added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
note_fe_backend_invalid_loc expects three arguments (file, line, column), and
will assert when only given two. The other two places in this file that use
1 - 100 of 229 matches
Mail list logo
