fhahn added a comment.
In D87163#2276899 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D87163#2276899>, @dmajor wrote: > In D87163#2275896 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D87163#2275896>, @asbirlea wrote: > >> I checked in a fix in https://reviews.llvm.org/rGfc8200633122, but I haven't >> yet verified it addresses all the failures reported. > > Thanks, I've confirmed that this fixes our tests in their original form (not > reduced). > > Our day-to-day testing of LLVM trunk is limited though, maybe one-tenth of > our full suite. Since this code has some risks, I could start a full run to > throw more testing at it. But that takes more machine capacity and human > effort to remove flaky failures, so I'd prefer to wait until the odds are > good that there won't be further changes. Let me know when you think it's > ready. I think I managed to come up with another test case that unfortunately is not covered by the recent fix. I think we might need to be even more conservative when walking across MemoryPhis and put up D87778 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D87778>, which includes the test case, which is crafted so that the result of PHI translation dominate the relevant blocks during translation. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87163/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87163 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
