https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133535
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic commented:
LGTM
Something I don't entirely like is that MIMetadata holds DebugLoc, but
copyMIMetadata does not copy it -- instead, it needs to be passed to
CreateMachineInstr. But given how this is used it's not really a problem...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
nikic wrote:
> I'm not actively aware of any cases where the non-integrality is being used
> to block invalid optimizations ... but I do know that, for example,
> SeparateConstOffsetFromGEP has a mode (which I think Nvidia uses) that turns
> pointer arithmetic into ptrtoint/inttoptr pairs.
Th
nikic wrote:
Looks like the release binaries jobs are failing.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151245
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
> I would be happy to change this to just unstable and external state. I'm not
> particularly happy with this name but I can't come up with something better.
I think we should do that.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105735
___
nikic wrote:
Yes, I feel strongly that this should not be backported. This patch is both
unimportant and risky.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150771
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm
Author: Nikita Popov
Date: 2025-07-28T10:02:10+02:00
New Revision: a268b616a622b20056c908c53aa762d1fc5402f1
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a268b616a622b20056c908c53aa762d1fc5402f1
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a268b616a622b20056c908c53aa762d1fc5402f1.diff
Author: Nikita Popov
Date: 2025-07-28T09:52:06+02:00
New Revision: 4a2a3608513404b7005f96c1b4476f91d34f01de
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4a2a3608513404b7005f96c1b4476f91d34f01de
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4a2a3608513404b7005f96c1b4476f91d34f01de.diff
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150746
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150746
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic requested changes to this pull request.
I don't think this should be backported.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150771
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cg
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150771
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150646
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
@vvereschaka That issue only needs the change to the sort predicate, not this
whole PR.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150192
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi
nikic wrote:
Do we need all of those? For the release branch, can we revert the change
fully? Or is other stuff already based on it?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150425
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.o
nikic wrote:
> If we're going to add this, it would be good to add the other one of the
> pair—the set-address instruction—at the same time.
>
> The Rust strict provenance model (and, hopefully, C++29) and CHERI both have
> these as parts of the provenance model: an instruction / function that
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150187
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
@davidchisnall See https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139357.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105735
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/l
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150026
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
Is this mitigating a regression? If not, I don't think we should backport
optimization improvements.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149815
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.ll
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87573
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -3156,6 +3157,20 @@ static void combineMetadata(Instruction *K, const
Instruction *J,
MDNode::getMergedCallsiteMetadata(KCallSite, JCallSite));
}
+ // Merge callee_type metadata.
+ if (!AAOnly) {
+auto *JCalleeType = J->getMetadata(LLVMContext::M
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149385
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -3423,6 +3424,17 @@ static void combineMetadata(Instruction *K, const
Instruction *J,
MDNode::getMergedCallsiteMetadata(KCallSite, JCallSite));
}
+ // Merge callee_type metadata.
+ // Handle separately to support cases where only one instruction has
@@ -5193,6 +5194,34 @@ void Verifier::visitCallsiteMetadata(Instruction &I,
MDNode *MD) {
visitCallStackMetadata(MD);
}
+static inline bool isConstantIntMetadataOperand(const Metadata *MD) {
+ if (auto *VAL = dyn_cast(MD)) {
nikic wrote:
No braces for sin
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149126
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149048
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ void StringToOffsetTable::EmitStringTableDef(raw_ostream &OS,
#pragma GCC diagnostic push
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Woverlength-strings"
#endif
-{} constexpr char {}{}Storage[] = )",
+{} constexpr char {}{}Storage[] =)",
nikic wrote:
I
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/148840
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ void StringToOffsetTable::EmitStringTableDef(raw_ostream &OS,
#pragma GCC diagnostic push
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Woverlength-strings"
#endif
-{} constexpr char {}{}Storage[] = )",
+{} constexpr char {}{}Storage[] =)",
nikic wrote:
I
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/148571
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -938,6 +933,11 @@ def calloc : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
// compiler-rt, not available for most architectures
//
+def __ashlti3 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
+def __lshrti3 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
+def __ashrti3 : RuntimeL
https://github.com/nikic updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147034
>From c50b409b6b523fa4b8164b80515a93b12e1b5cd4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Phoebe Wang
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 13:04:23 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [X86] Ignore NSW when DstSVT is i32 (#131755)
We don't have PACKSS
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146191
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -313,6 +313,7 @@ struct Configuration {
bool warnDebugInfoUnusable = true;
bool warnLongSectionNames = true;
bool warnStdcallFixup = true;
+ bool warnExportedDllMain = true;
nikic wrote:
This is an ABI break.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pul
https://github.com/nikic commented:
Can you please pre-commit a PhaseOrdering test that demonstrates the problem
you are trying to solve? It's hard to understand whether this is the correct
solution to the problem without an actual test case.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145613
__
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146191
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -235,29 +247,57 @@ void
RuntimeLibcallEmitter::emitGetInitRuntimeLibcallNames(
// TODO: Emit libcall names as string offset table.
OS << "#ifdef GET_INIT_RUNTIME_LIBCALL_NAMES\n"
-"const char *const "
+"const RTLIB::LibcallImpl "
"llvm::RTLIB::
@@ -235,29 +247,57 @@ void
RuntimeLibcallEmitter::emitGetInitRuntimeLibcallNames(
// TODO: Emit libcall names as string offset table.
OS << "#ifdef GET_INIT_RUNTIME_LIBCALL_NAMES\n"
-"const char *const "
+"const RTLIB::LibcallImpl "
"llvm::RTLIB::
@@ -882,7 +902,7 @@ def exp10f128 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
def sinf128 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
def cosf128 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
def tanf128 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
-def tanhf128 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
+def tanhf128 : RuntimeLibcallImpl;
nikic wrote:
Should probably b
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144973
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144973
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -235,29 +247,57 @@ void
RuntimeLibcallEmitter::emitGetInitRuntimeLibcallNames(
// TODO: Emit libcall names as string offset table.
OS << "#ifdef GET_INIT_RUNTIME_LIBCALL_NAMES\n"
-"const char *const "
+"const RTLIB::LibcallImpl "
"llvm::RTLIB::
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145054
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145054
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
Could you please also add a negative test where extractvalue does not simplify
(e.g. same as current but swap 0 and 1).
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/145054
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing li
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144692
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144696
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -321,6 +321,24 @@ void RuntimeLibcallsInfo::initLibcalls(const Triple &TT) {
setLibcallName(RTLIB::OGT_F128, "__gtkf2");
setLibcallName(RTLIB::UO_F128, "__unordkf2");
+setLibcallName(RTLIB::ACOS_F128, "acosf128");
+setLibcallName(RTLIB::ASIN_F128, "asinf128"
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144299
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
I'm not entirely sure about this one, as this is a performance rather than
correctness fix and we're late in the release cycle. But the fix itself does
seem quite safe and it blocks clickhouse from updating to LLVM 20.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144322
_
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144322
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144322
Backport of https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143020 for
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/139050.
>From 9792f981063d6ddadd3678ac31e2254daa6aa9cf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nikita Popov
Dat
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142730
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143163
Backport of
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/32837f376f3c795d3ae6e632adc4f1a60180a646.
>From 2c1c9730974c384b10bccc9f4a4f63c94377d302 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Green
Date: Thu, 29 May 2025
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143163
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -528,23 +528,20 @@ RuntimeLibcallSignatureTable
&getRuntimeLibcallSignatures() {
// constructor for use with a static variable
struct StaticLibcallNameMap {
StringMap Map;
- StaticLibcallNameMap() {
-static const std::pair NameLibcalls[] = {
-#define HANDLE_LIBCALL(c
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+;; Test if the callee_type metadata attached to indirect call sites adhere to
the expected format.
+
+; RUN: llvm-as < %s | llvm-dis | FileCheck %s
+define i32 @_Z13call_indirectPFicEc(ptr %func, i8 signext %x) !type !0 {
+entry:
+ %func.addr = alloca ptr, alig
@@ -1302,6 +1302,24 @@ static void addRange(SmallVectorImpl
&EndPoints,
EndPoints.push_back(High);
}
+MDNode *MDNode::getMergedCalleeTypeMetadata(LLVMContext &Ctx, MDNode *A,
+MDNode *B) {
+ SmallVector AB;
+ SmallSet MergedCall
nikic wrote:
The way FileCheck works this will pass even if the metadata is not dropped. You
could try whether `FileCheck --match-full-lines` works. Otherwise you could use
explicit `CHECK-NOT` or `{{$}}`.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87573
_
@@ -4161,6 +4161,11 @@ Instruction *InstCombinerImpl::visitCallBase(CallBase
&Call) {
Call, Builder.CreateBitOrPointerCast(ReturnedArg, CallTy));
}
+ // Drop unnecessary callee_type metadata from calls that were converted
+ // into direct calls.
+ if (Call.
@@ -3377,6 +3377,11 @@ static void combineMetadata(Instruction *K, const
Instruction *J,
K->setMetadata(Kind,
MDNode::getMostGenericAlignmentOrDereferenceable(JMD, KMD));
break;
+ case LLVMContext::MD_callee_type:
+if (!AAOnly)
+
@@ -5096,6 +5097,19 @@ void Verifier::visitCallsiteMetadata(Instruction &I,
MDNode *MD) {
visitCallStackMetadata(MD);
}
+void Verifier::visitCalleeTypeMetadata(Instruction &I, MDNode *MD) {
+ Check(isa(I), "!callee_type metadata should only exist on calls",
+&I);
+
@@ -1302,6 +1302,24 @@ static void addRange(SmallVectorImpl
&EndPoints,
EndPoints.push_back(High);
}
+MDNode *MDNode::getMergedCalleeTypeMetadata(LLVMContext &Ctx, MDNode *A,
+MDNode *B) {
+ SmallVector AB;
+ SmallSet MergedCall
@@ -1252,6 +1252,12 @@ class MDNode : public Metadata {
bool isReplaceable() const { return isTemporary() || isAlwaysReplaceable(); }
bool isAlwaysReplaceable() const { return getMetadataID() == DIAssignIDKind;
}
+ bool hasGeneralizedMDString() const {
n
@@ -1302,6 +1302,24 @@ static void addRange(SmallVectorImpl
&EndPoints,
EndPoints.push_back(High);
}
+MDNode *MDNode::getMergedCalleeTypeMetadata(LLVMContext &Ctx, MDNode *A,
+MDNode *B) {
+ SmallVector AB;
+ SmallSet MergedCall
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142886
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic requested changes to this pull request.
I do not think these tests provide value.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142536
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/c
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142311
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142311
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141957
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142039
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142031
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -7170,16 +7165,31 @@ bool X86TTIImpl::isProfitableToSinkOperands(Instruction
*I,
II->getIntrinsicID() == Intrinsic::fshr)
ShiftAmountOpNum = 2;
}
-
if (ShiftAmountOpNum == -1)
return false;
+ auto *ShiftAmount = &I->getOperandUse(ShiftAmountOpNum);
nikic wrote:
@pcc I think using fsh should at least help to get a ror instead of the
shr+shl+or.
Actually getting the value duplicated+sunk into each block is typically done in
CGP, which has a bunch of related transforms. The most generic is probably
tryToSinkFreeOperands driven by TTI.isPro
@@ -33,8 +34,11 @@ PreservedAnalyses EmbedBitcodePass::run(Module &M,
ModuleAnalysisManager &AM) {
std::string Data;
raw_string_ostream OS(Data);
+ // Clone the module with with Thin LTO, since ThinLTOBitcodeWriterPass
changes
nikic wrote:
```suggestio
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
Okay, let's go with this for now.
Compile-time impact of cloning the module is about 0.2% when building clang
with fat LTO:
https://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=11a01e851a06188ae946ace1140f866d7a667221&to=46e037d763e7997a83
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/13
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141461
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140060
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140902
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic commented:
I'm not super clear on what it is you're trying to fix here.
Probably LowerTypeTests should be directly emitting a fshl/fshr instead of a
bit shift sequence to make matching to rotate more reliable. Would that help
you or not?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-p
https://github.com/nikic requested changes to this pull request.
If you're using stacked pull requests, please link the other PRs from the
stack. It's impossible to understand the context otherwise. Based on just the
changes in this PR:
* The EarlyCSE and GVN changes do not make sense to me.
nikic wrote:
The LLVM 19 release is no longer supported. You'll have to apply this as a
local patch if you want to build and old LLVM 19 with a new libstdc++.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138550
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-b
https://github.com/nikic closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138550
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
@ilovepi Does it also work on the release branch? I'd mainly see the clone
module approach as something easily backportable for the release branch, but I
assume for main we'll want a different solution?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/13
_
https://github.com/nikic commented:
Didn't we switch away from cloning because it breaks blockaddress somehow?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/13
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.o
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138676
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
I think this may have been noise. I reran this and there are no differences
over the significance threshold:
https://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=6c1bb48cc45396894597c8cb897c31205d1bdeb6&to=1837fe71fcfb4363fd2b66cdb9ff6a82b3f380fb&stat=instructions:u
https://gith
nikic wrote:
Closing this as https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127751 has landed.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127496
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
https://github.com/nikic closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127496
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139345
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -180,6 +180,10 @@ llvm::getKnowledgeForValue(const Value *V,
}
return RetainedKnowledge::none();
}
+
+ if (!V->hasUseList())
+return RetainedKnowledge::none();
nikic wrote:
As a followup, we should completely remove the non-AC code in this fu
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138961
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138737
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138729
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138638
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic commented:
Peculiarly, this has a negative effect on stage1 builds using gcc and a
positive effect on stage2 builds using clang:
https://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=420eca364b07bad78dc0a5d21da5980493798df0&to=00be79cbc7dea09fcd8a57ea51b3e800564fd986&s
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134794
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -73,28 +73,16 @@ static void rewriteFuncWithReturnType(Function &OldF, Value
*NewRetValue) {
}
}
- // Now prune any CFG edges we have to deal with.
- //
- // Use KeepOneInputPHIs in case the instruction we are using for the return
is
- // that phi.
- // TODO: C
1 - 100 of 575 matches
Mail list logo
