ChuanqiXu9 wrote: > @zixu-w and @ChuanqiXu9 Just want to clarify policies about changes > reversion. As far as I understand it was one example in some private codebase > with no reproducer publicly available. I can understand and completely agree > if it breaks any existing test or llvm-build bot. But in this case I think it > would be good to at least wait for the review. Such reversion without > providing a reproducer does not allow to fix the issues or even verify that > it is related to this PR. This PR fixes another crash with clear reproducers. > > Sorry, didn't notice that it is LLVM bootstrap build but still, no still I > don't see steps to reproduce in #126973.
CC @AaronBallman for the policy related things. And my point in the above post is, **if** we revert it in the trunk and it was backported to the release branch, we should revert it in the release branch too. My point is majorly the **if**. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121245 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
