[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -204,6 +205,10 @@ static cl::opt EnableLoopInterchange("enable-loopinterchange", cl::init(false), cl::Hidden, cl::desc("Enable the LoopInterchange Pass")); +static cl::opt EnableLoopFusion("enable-loopfusion", cl::init(false),

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From be9eb6a39906fac945ea206eec80f4cc18bd4896 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/9] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -52,6 +52,15 @@ // CHECK-INTERCHANGE-LOOPS: "-floop-interchange" // CHECK-NO-INTERCHANGE-LOOPS: "-fno-loop-interchange" +// RUN: %clang -### -S -fexperimental-loop-fusion %s 2>&1 | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-FUSE-LOOPS %s madhur13490 wrote: I don't thi

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ CODEGENOPT(StackArrays, 1, 0) ///< -fstack-arrays (enable the stack-arrays pass) CODEGENOPT(VectorizeLoop, 1, 0) ///< Enable loop vectorization. CODEGENOPT(VectorizeSLP, 1, 0) ///< Enable SLP vectorization. CODEGENOPT(InterchangeLoops, 1, 0) ///< Enable loop

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From be9eb6a39906fac945ea206eec80f4cc18bd4896 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/8] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From be9eb6a39906fac945ea206eec80f4cc18bd4896 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/7] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -6870,6 +6870,8 @@ void Clang::ConstructJob(Compilation &C, const JobAction &JA, options::OPT_fno_unroll_loops); Args.AddLastArg(CmdArgs, options::OPT_floop_interchange, options::OPT_fno_loop_interchange); + Args.AddLastArg(CmdArgs, op

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: > You need to click "Re-request review" from folks who have requested changes. Thanks for that! But I am following the below from "[Contributing to LLVM](https://llvm.org/docs/Contributing.html#how-to-submit-a-patch)" _If you have received no comments on your patch for a wee

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -6870,6 +6870,8 @@ void Clang::ConstructJob(Compilation &C, const JobAction &JA, options::OPT_fno_unroll_loops); Args.AddLastArg(CmdArgs, options::OPT_floop_interchange, options::OPT_fno_loop_interchange); + Args.AddLastArg(CmdArgs, op

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -4268,6 +4268,10 @@ def floop_interchange : Flag<["-"], "floop-interchange">, Group, HelpText<"Enable the loop interchange pass">, Visibility<[ClangOption, CC1Option, FlangOption, FC1Option]>; def fno_loop_interchange: Flag<["-"], "fno-loop-interchange">, Group, HelpTe

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: Ping! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: Gentle ping! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: gg > Just in case: it's not "just after LoopInterchange", it's "before > LoopDeletion". If you want to run it just after LoopInterchange, please add > LoopFuse after adding `LPM` to `OptimizePM`. It might be better adding some > test to check the position. > Yes, realized

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From be9eb6a39906fac945ea206eec80f4cc18bd4896 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/5] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From be9eb6a39906fac945ea206eec80f4cc18bd4896 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/5] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -1671,6 +1671,11 @@ void CompilerInvocationBase::GenerateCodeGenArgs(const CodeGenOptions &Opts, else GenerateArg(Consumer, OPT_fno_loop_interchange); + if (Opts.FuseLoops) +GenerateArg(Consumer, OPT_fexperimental_loop_fusion); + else madhur134

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -4268,6 +4268,10 @@ def floop_interchange : Flag<["-"], "floop-interchange">, Group, HelpText<"Enable the loop interchange pass">, Visibility<[ClangOption, CC1Option, FlangOption, FC1Option]>; def fno_loop_interchange: Flag<["-"], "fno-loop-interchange">, Group, HelpTe

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: > > In that case. it may be better to move it to > > `buildModuleOptimizationPipeline`. This is undoubtedly an optimization, and > > a non-trivial one at that. There are still open questions about the exact > > placement of the pass within the optimization pipeline, but movi

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From be9eb6a39906fac945ea206eec80f4cc18bd4896 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/4] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: Gentle ping @tarunprabhu @kasuga-fj https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -204,6 +205,10 @@ static cl::opt EnableLoopInterchange("enable-loopinterchange", cl::init(false), cl::Hidden, cl::desc("Enable the LoopInterchange Pass")); +static cl::opt EnableLoopFusion("enable-loopfusion", cl::init(false), +

[clang] [flang] [llvm] Introduce -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -fexperimental-loop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From 27552bc04f6545c5be314fea757f8961c6854737 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/3] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: > > What do you think is the right place in pass pipeline? > > I don't know, but just a gut feeling, somewhere in > `buildModuleOptimizationPipeline` looks reasonable to me rather than > `buildFunctionSimplificationPipeline`. However, again, it should be > determined by wha

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -204,6 +205,10 @@ static cl::opt EnableLoopInterchange("enable-loopinterchange", cl::init(false), cl::Hidden, cl::desc("Enable the LoopInterchange Pass")); +static cl::opt EnableLoopFusion("enable-loopfusion", cl::init(false),

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: @tarunprabhu Sure, I can take that suggestion. I have done the changes. @kasuga-fj I fixed the rebase issue in `flang/docs`. > I don't think this implies that the pass should be part of the function > simplification pipeline. Its position should be determined by what the pas

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From 3b71a3ca82ed5bfdad8836f317c9476af964e432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From 3b71a3ca82ed5bfdad8836f317c9476af964e432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From 3b71a3ca82ed5bfdad8836f317c9476af964e432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: > You probably made a mistake with the rebase... Thanks. I think I fixed it. Can you please have a look again? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.ll

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From 3b71a3ca82ed5bfdad8836f317c9476af964e432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From 3b71a3ca82ed5bfdad8836f317c9476af964e432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From 3b71a3ca82ed5bfdad8836f317c9476af964e432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -2112,7 +2124,6 @@ PassBuilder::buildLTODefaultPipeline(OptimizationLevel Level, LPM.addPass(LoopFlattenPass()); LPM.addPass(IndVarSimplifyPass()); LPM.addPass(LoopDeletionPass()); - // FIXME: Add loop interchange. madhur13490 wrote: Done https:/

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -518,6 +524,9 @@ PassBuilder::buildO1FunctionSimplificationPipeline(OptimizationLevel Level, invokeLoopOptimizerEndEPCallbacks(LPM2, Level); + if (PTO.LoopFuse) +FPM.addPass(LoopFusePass()); + madhur13490 wrote: I have moved it to the function sim

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -3157,7 +3157,7 @@ void tools::handleVectorizeSLPArgs(const ArgList &Args, void tools::handleInterchangeLoopsArgs(const ArgList &Args, ArgStringList &CmdArgs) { - // FIXME: instead of relying on shouldEnableVectorizerAtOLevel, we may

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

madhur13490 wrote: I am taking over this change. Trying to address review comments. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

https://github.com/madhur13490 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142686 >From e1bd099f2efca124dfb2f598d7b47d723080516d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Pop Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 13:50:38 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang --- clang/include/c

[clang] [UserManual] Document clang option for loop interchange (PR #147014)

https://github.com/madhur13490 closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147014 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [UserManual] Document clang option for loop interchange (PR #147014)

madhur13490 wrote: I see. I can drop this, but I couldn't find a link from the User Manual to the [Clang command line argument reference](https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangCommandLineReference.html#cmdoption-clang-floop-interchange). Is there one? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/1470

[clang] [UserManual] Document clang option for loop interchange (PR #147014)

https://github.com/madhur13490 created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147014 None >From e19caa08f790159fbda9ce5f4b22089b36add661 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Madhur Amilkanthwar Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 21:54:29 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] [UserManual] Document clang option for loop inter

[clang] [flang] [llvm] add -floop-fuse to clang and flang (PR #142686)

@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ page](https://llvm.org/releases/). * -floop-interchange is now recognized by flang. * -floop-interchange is enabled by default at -O2 and above. +* -fexperimental-fuse-loops is now recognized by flang. madhur13490 wrote: We should make a sim

[clang] [Clang][PGO][UserManual] Specify usage of -b flag (PR #139763)

https://github.com/madhur13490 closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139763 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [Clang][PGO][UserManual] Specify usage of -b flag (PR #139763)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139763 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [Clang][UserManual] Specify usage of -b flag (PR #139763)

https://github.com/madhur13490 created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139763 llvm-profgen cannot accept the perf profiles collected without `-b` and errors out with a message `"Invalid perf script input!"`. This can also be validated from the code in function `checkPerfScriptType()`

[clang] [AArch64] Remove strict checks from init-aarch64.c (PR #134338)

madhur13490 wrote: Thanks all. Abandoning this change, will find an appropriate solution for downstream. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134338 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li

[clang] [AArch64] Remove strict checks from init-aarch64.c (PR #134338)

https://github.com/madhur13490 closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134338 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [AArch64] Remove strict checks from init-aarch64.c (PR #134338)

madhur13490 wrote: > The other tests should be strengthened to always use -NEXT. The exact set of > macros should be tested; don't want others hiding in the gaps Thanks, @arsenm. However, the strict checks are creating problems in our downstream compiler and rebasing. Our downstream compiler e

[clang] [AArch64] Remove strict checks from init-aarch64.c (PR #134338)

https://github.com/madhur13490 created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134338 The checks in init-aarch64.c expect macros to be back-to-back which seems very strict. This change aims to relax this and use just AARCH64 instead of AARCH64-NEXT. This way, we maintain the order of the mac

[clang] [llvm] [AArch64][SVE] Improve fixed-length addressing modes. (PR #129732)

@@ -7380,12 +7380,27 @@ bool AArch64DAGToDAGISel::SelectAddrModeIndexedSVE(SDNode *Root, SDValue N, return false; SDValue VScale = N.getOperand(1); - if (VScale.getOpcode() != ISD::VSCALE) + int64_t MulImm = std::numeric_limits::max(); + if (VScale.getOpcode() == ISD

[clang] [CMake] Fix variable name (PR #127967)

madhur13490 wrote: > > The fix is NOT correct. You need to enclose in quotes as @tstellar mentions > > in #126876 > > ` llvm_canonicalize_cmake_booleans` converts the string to an integer so you > don't need the quotes now that this function is called with the correct > variable. This is what

[clang] [CMake] Fix variable name (PR #127967)

madhur13490 wrote: Please merge this soon. This has broken our CI miserably and has blocked all our testing. Thanks! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127967 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi

[clang] [llvm] [Clang][Driver] Add an option to control loop-interchange (PR #125830)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125830 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [llvm] [Clang][Driver] Add an option to control loop-interchange (PR #125830)

https://github.com/madhur13490 approved this pull request. LGTM https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125830 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [llvm] [CMake] Preserve clang-prebolt (PR #109351)

madhur13490 wrote: Here are CMAKE variables we use downstream.  ``` -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=bolt;clang;openmp;lld    

[clang] [llvm] [CMake] Preserve clang-prebolt (PR #109351)

madhur13490 wrote: This commit is breaking LTO-PGO-BOLT build while optimizing clang with BOLT. ``` [3064/3065] Merging BOLT fdata Using legacy profile format. Profile from 2 files merged. [3064/3065] Optimizing Clang with BOLT BOLT-INFO: shared object or position-independent executable detecte

[clang] [clang] check deduction consistency when partial ordering function templates (PR #100692)

madhur13490 wrote: @mizvekov Is it possible to revert this until you work on the solution? SPEC is failing since this patch is landed. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100692 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://li

[clang] [AArch64] Add getHostCPUFeatures to query for enabled features in cpu… (PR #97749)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97749 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [AArch64] Add getHostCPUFeatures to query for enabled features in cpu… (PR #97749)

https://github.com/madhur13490 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97749 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [AArch64] Add getHostCPUFeatures to query for enabled features in cpu… (PR #97749)

@@ -445,4 +445,21 @@ void aarch64::getAArch64TargetFeatures(const Driver &D, if (Args.getLastArg(options::OPT_mno_bti_at_return_twice)) Features.push_back("+no-bti-at-return-twice"); + + // Parse AArch64 CPU Features + const Arg *CPUArg = Args.getLastArg(options::OPT_m

[clang] [AMDGPU] Correctly determine the toolchain linker (PR #89803)

madhur13490 wrote: Thanks for fixing this after our discord chats! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89803 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [AMDGPU] Correctly determine the toolchain linker (PR #89803)

@@ -24,3 +24,9 @@ // RUN: -L. -fconvergent-functions %s 2>&1 | FileCheck -check-prefix=MCPU %s // LTO: clang{{.*}} "-flto=full"{{.*}}"-fconvergent-functions" // MCPU: ld.lld{{.*}}"-L."{{.*}}"-plugin-opt=mcpu=gfx906" + +// We do not suppor the BFD linker, but we should be able