https://github.com/vitalybuka closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83470
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
vitalybuka wrote:
abandoning
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83470
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
oskarwirga wrote:
> I changed my design, so I don't need this patch. Given
> https://godbolt.org/z/4KfEKq7zb, I can revert your patch, or just leave it as
> is. I have no preference.
I would prefer leaving it as is, I will make a note to revisit this pending
further testing on my end to see h
vitalybuka wrote:
I changed my design, so I don't need that change as is.
Given https://godbolt.org/z/4KfEKq7zb, I can revert your patch, or just leave
it as is. I have no preference.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83470
___
cfe-commits mai
vitalybuka wrote:
> If you are going to remove this feature, I would rather you simply revert the
> old commit. There is no point leaving the flag in at this point.
>
> I had explored earlier dealing with the optimization at a later time in the
> compilation pipeline, but got nowhere and this
https://github.com/oskarwirga requested changes to this pull request.
If you are going to remove this feature, I would rather you simply revert the
old commit. There is no point leaving the flag in at this point.
I had explored earlier dealing with the optimization at a later time in the
comp
vitalybuka wrote:
> > It happens later, in LLVM backend, it needs to be fixed.
>
> From [#65972
> (comment)](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65972#issuecomment-1971855638)
>
> Is this something you have planned to fix? If not would replacing the .size()
> counter with perhaps a seed
oskarwirga wrote:
> It happens later, in LLVM backend, it needs to be fixed.
>From https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65972#issuecomment-1971855638
Is this something you have planned to fix? If not would replacing the .size()
counter with perhaps a seeded random uint8 be acceptable?
M
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-codegen
Author: Vitaly Buka (vitalybuka)
Changes
Removing `TrapBB->getParent()->size()` added with #65972. Counter
as-is
is not very unique after inlining https://godbolt.org/z/4KfEKq7zb (see
m()).
---
Full diff: https
https://github.com/vitalybuka created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83470
Removing `TrapBB->getParent()->size()` added with #65972. Counter as-is
is not very unique after inlining https://godbolt.org/z/4KfEKq7zb (see
m()).
>From e44df1c386d96472614939658e496cf2a9643e05 Mon Sep 17 0
10 matches
Mail list logo
