On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Simon Pilgrim <llvm-...@redking.me.uk> wrote: > On 06/08/2015 18:05, Hans Wennborg wrote: >> >> On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Simon Pilgrim <llvm-...@redking.me.uk> >> wrote: >>> >>> Author: rksimon >>> Date: Sun Aug 2 10:28:10 2015 >>> New Revision: 243851 >>> >>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=243851&view=rev >>> Log: >>> Fix invalid shufflevector operands >>> >>> This patch fixes bug 23800 ( >>> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23800#c2 ). There existed a case where >>> the index operand from extractelement was directly used to create a >>> shufflevector mask. Since the index can be of any integral type but the mask >>> must only contain 32 bit integers a 64 bit index operand led to an assertion >>> error later on. >>> >>> Committed on behalf of mpflanzer (Moritz Pflanzer) >>> >>> Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10838 >> >> Is this something we should merge to 3.7? > > It is an edge case and not a regression - at best it would be a 'nice to > have'. But it would be a very straightforward merge.
John, what do you think? Should we merge this to 3.7? Thanks, Hans _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
