hassnaaHamdi wrote:
> > Hi @teresajohnson what do you think? For the case of PGO, I think we may
> > disable it. I think The speculative devirtualization is useful for cases
> > where we don't have enough information.
>
> Yes I think the spec results are promising. I'd suggest also trying with
teresajohnson wrote:
> Hi @teresajohnson what do you think? For the case of PGO, I think we may
> disable it. I think The speculative devirtualization is useful for cases
> where we don't have enough information.
Yes I think the spec results are promising. I'd suggest also trying with a
large
hassnaaHamdi wrote:
Hi @teresajohnson
what do you think?
For the case of PGO, I think we may disable it. I think The speculative
devirtualization is useful for cases where we don't have enough information.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
__
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
hassnaaHamdi wrote:
> This is an interesting idea, thanks for the performance numbers. It could
> also be useful for LTO without whole program visibility enabled, where most
> of the vtables and type tests will end up with public visibility making them
> ineligible for WPD. But I suspect it ma
hassnaaHamdi wrote:
> This is an interesting idea, thanks for the performance numbers. It could
> also be useful for LTO without whole program visibility enabled, where most
> of the vtables and type tests will end up with public visibility making them
> ineligible for WPD. But I suspect it ma
hassnaaHamdi wrote:
Hi
@teresajohnson @pcc @PiJoules @mingmingl-llvm
Any feedback about this? 👀
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
teresajohnson wrote:
This is an interesting idea, thanks for the performance numbers. It could also
be useful for LTO without whole program visibility enabled, where most of the
vtables and type tests will end up with public visibility making them
ineligible for WPD. But I suspect it may not b
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi deleted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1342,26 +1353,28 @@ bool DevirtModule::trySingleImplDevirt(
// If the only implementation has local linkage, we must promote to external
// to make it visible to thin LTO objects. We can only get here during the
// ThinLTO export phase.
hassnaaHamdi w
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/hassnaaHamdi created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141777
None
>From 702f64a84914d2fe467a12babd99338f2215d425 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hassnaa Hamdi
Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 14:27:34 +
Subject: [PATCH] Enable WPD without lto
---
clang/lib/CodeGen/CGVTab
16 matches
Mail list logo
