[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44458] LLVM 9.0.1 release missing from download page
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44458 Zufu Liu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Zufu Liu --- Great thanks. So I mark this as fixed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43620] llvm.assume blocks vectorizer predication
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43620 Florian Hahn changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Fixed By Commit(s)||23c113802e21253332dc41fba66 ||39106b7b1e461 --- Comment #2 from Florian Hahn --- Should be fixed by https://reviews.llvm.org/rG23c113802e21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 32499] [java] space is added before :: in Java 8 method references sometimes
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32499 Jens Fischer changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #1 from Jens Fischer --- It looks like this was fixed sometime between 5.0.0 and 9.0.0. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44565] New: [X86] Failure to use MOVMSK reduction result for branches
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44565
Bug ID: 44565
Summary: [X86] Failure to use MOVMSK reduction result for
branches
Product: libraries
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: Windows NT
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Backend: X86
Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org
Reporter: llvm-...@redking.me.uk
CC: craig.top...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org,
llvm-...@redking.me.uk, spatel+l...@rotateright.com
https://godbolt.org/z/GLDirF
If we are selecting between 2 values using a comparison reduction then we use
the all_of/any_of MOVMSK result directly:
define i32 @select(<2 x double> %a0) {
%1 = fcmp ogt <2 x double> %a0, zeroinitializer
%2 = extractelement <2 x i1> %1, i32 0
%3 = extractelement <2 x i1> %1, i32 1
%4 = and i1 %2, %3
%5 = select i1 %4, i32 42, i32 88
ret i32 %5
}
select: # @select
vxorpd %xmm1, %xmm1, %xmm1
vcmpltpd %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm0
vmovmskpd %xmm0, %eax
cmpb $3, %al
movl $42, %ecx
movl $88, %eax
cmovel %ecx, %eax
retq
But if we decided to create a branch instead then the MOVMSK bits are used
separately, meaning we end up with 2 compares+jmps instead:
define i32 @jmp(<2 x double> %a0) {
%1 = fcmp ogt <2 x double> %a0, zeroinitializer
%2 = extractelement <2 x i1> %1, i32 0
%3 = extractelement <2 x i1> %1, i32 1
%4 = and i1 %2, %3
br i1 %4, label %foo, label %bar
foo:
ret i32 42
bar:
ret i32 88
}
jmp: # @jmp
vxorpd %xmm1, %xmm1, %xmm1
vcmpltpd %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm0
vmovmskpd %xmm0, %eax
testb $1, %al
je .LBB1_3
shrb %al
je .LBB1_3
movl $42, %eax
retq
.LBB1_3: # %bar
movl $88, %eax
retq
when I think it could be:
jmp: # @jmp
vxorpd %xmm1, %xmm1, %xmm1
vcmpltpd %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm0
vmovmskpd %xmm0, %eax
cmp $3, %al
jne .LBB1_3
movl $42, %eax
retq
.LBB1_3: # %bar
movl $88, %eax
retq
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44566] New: AST creates CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr when Expr isnt dependent
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44566
Bug ID: 44566
Summary: AST creates CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr when Expr isnt
dependent
Product: clang
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Frontend
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: n.jame...@hotmail.co.uk
CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, neeil...@live.com,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
Take this class
>#include
>
>template
>class C {
> int _A;
>
> public:
> C& operator=(const C& Other){
> this->_A = Other._A;
> return *this;
> }
> C& operator==(C&& Other){
> _A = std::move(Other._A);
> return *this;
> }
>};
The AST for the copy assignment '=' line is
BinaryOperator '' '='
|-CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr '' lvalue ->_A
| -CXXThisExpr 'C *' this
|-CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr '' lvalue ._A
| -DeclRefExpr 'const C' lvalue ParmVar 0x555e4f6cc108 'Other'
'const C &'
Likewise the move assignment '=' line is
BinaryOperator '' '='
|-MemberExpr 'int' lvalue ->_A 0x555e4f6cc058
| -CXXThisExpr 'C *' implicit this
|-CallExpr ''
| -UnresolvedLookupExpr '' lvalue
(no ADL) = 'move' 0x555e4f65b538
| -CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr '' lvalue ._A
| -DeclRefExpr 'C' lvalue ParmVar 0x555e4f6cc308 'Other' 'C
&&'
The AST only prints out a MemberExpr for the implicit this (in the move
asignment).
The explicit this (in the copy assignment) should never be a
CXXDependentScopeMemberExpr.
Likewise in this example as the Other param is templated on the class, that
could be made into MemberExpr.
This shortfall makes creating source code analysis and refactoring tools harder
to implement as its harder to find where members are referenced.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44567] New: Lambda incorrectly passes SNIFAE check for bool conversion in Objective-C++
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44567 Bug ID: 44567 Summary: Lambda incorrectly passes SNIFAE check for bool conversion in Objective-C++ Product: clang Version: unspecified Hardware: Macintosh OS: MacOS X Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P Component: -New Bugs Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org Reporter: rajveer_au...@hotmail.com CC: htmldevelo...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, neeil...@live.com, richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk Created attachment 23020 --> https://bugs.llvm.org/attachment.cgi?id=23020&action=edit Code sample The attached file has a SNIFAE check to see if a type T can be converted to a bool (`bool(T)`), and a set of `execute` functions where the correct one is picked based on this check. When compiled as C++17, this check correctly fails when the type T is a lambda and the file type is .cpp. If the file is renamed to .mm however (to make the file be compiled as Objective-C++), the SNIFAE check incorrectly passes, which leads to the incorrect `execute` function being invoked. This then fails as the lambda is attempted to be converted to an Objective-C block, with the following error: Call to implicitly-deleted copy constructor of 'const (lambda at .../main.mm:68:25)' This error message is correct, however the compiler shouldn't get to this stage since the template check should fail for Objective-C++ too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44564] FindExplicitReferences test fails with EXPENSIVE_CHECKS
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44564 Kadir Cetinkaya changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed By Commit(s)||d54d71b67e60 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #1 from Kadir Cetinkaya --- Should be fixed after d54d71b67e60 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44568] New: Segfault due to incorrect initialization order in compiler extension
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44568 Bug ID: 44568 Summary: Segfault due to incorrect initialization order in compiler extension Product: new-bugs Version: trunk Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P Component: new bugs Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: sguel...@redhat.com CC: htmldevelo...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org The new compiler extension mecanism that landed in 24ab9b537e61b3fe5e6a1019492ff6530d82a3ee and 346de9b67228f42eb9b55fa3b426b5dedfdb1d40 can cause segmentation fault upon llvm::terminate due to invalid initialization order of ManagedStatic. The bug is fixed by https://reviews.llvm.org/D72493. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44569] New: Passing -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE={1, 2} does not lead to runtime checks being generated by clang
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44569
Bug ID: 44569
Summary: Passing -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE={1,2} does not lead to
runtime checks being generated by clang
Product: clang
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Frontend
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: sguel...@redhat.com
CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, neeil...@live.com,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
The problem has been discussed and solved in https://reviews.llvm.org/D71082,
which got reverted by 3d210ed3d1880c615776b07d1916edb400c245a6.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44570] New: 7.1.0 docs and release notes missing
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44570 Bug ID: 44570 Summary: 7.1.0 docs and release notes missing Product: Documentation Version: 7.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P Component: General docs Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: l...@ryandesign.com CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org On http://releases.llvm.org there is a line in the Download table that reads: 10 May 2019 7.1.0 downloadrelease notes docs The "release notes" and "docs" links for this version are "404 Not Found". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44405] [SystemZ] Backend emits an STRL to an unaligned address
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44405 Jonas Paulsson changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED --- Comment #8 from Jonas Paulsson --- Thank you Eli for the help. There is indeed several pack(1) #pragma:s in the csmith program, so I conclude that this is most likely a bug in the csmith generated program. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] Issue 20105 in oss-fuzz: llvm:clang-fuzzer: Stack-overflow in clang::DeclContext::lookup
Updates: Labels: ClusterFuzz-Verified Status: Verified Comment #1 on issue 20105 by ClusterFuzz-External: llvm:clang-fuzzer: Stack-overflow in clang::DeclContext::lookup https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=20105#c1 ClusterFuzz testcase 5692214693068800 is verified as fixed in https://oss-fuzz.com/revisions?job=libfuzzer_asan_llvm&range=202001150321:202001160452 If this is incorrect, please file a bug on https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/issues/new -- You received this message because: 1. You were specifically CC'd on the issue You may adjust your notification preferences at: https://bugs.chromium.org/hosting/settings Reply to this email to add a comment. ___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 43723] Instruction combining error with llvm.invariant.end intrinsic
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43723 Sanjay Patel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Fixed By Commit(s)||88fc5fdef6f7 --- Comment #6 from Sanjay Patel --- Maybe not the best solution, but this stopped the crashing: https://reviews.llvm.org/rG88fc5fdef6f7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44571] New: clang fails to set strictfp function attribute
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44571
Bug ID: 44571
Summary: clang fails to set strictfp function attribute
Product: clang
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: Windows NT
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: C++
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: mib.bugzi...@gmail.com
CC: blitzrak...@gmail.com, dgre...@apple.com,
erik.pilking...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
I got an email about this issue: It looks like clang isn't setting the
strictfp attribute added to the functions that use constrained intrinsics in
all cases. This problem has been identified in unary conversions, builtins, and
_Complex.
This fails to set the attribute, but uses constrained functions
float _Complex foo(float _Complex a, float _Complex b) {
return a + b;
}
Or this compiled with -fno-math-errno
float foo(float a, float b) {
return sinf(a);
}
Here's another example, https://godbolt.org/z/bcVV6A
Andy Kaylor suggested "Can’t we mark functions with the strictfp attribute any
time a constrained mode is enabled within the function, regardless of whether
or not it uses an FP operation? For example, functions get the
"unsafe-fp-math"="false" attribute without regard to whether or not they
contain fp operations. I would expect strictfp to be the same."
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.___
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44572] New: Should -Werror imply -Wl, --fatal-warnings?
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44572 Bug ID: 44572 Summary: Should -Werror imply -Wl,--fatal-warnings? Product: clang Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P Component: C Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org Reporter: s...@chromium.org CC: blitzrak...@gmail.com, dgre...@apple.com, erik.pilking...@gmail.com, llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk But GNU ld and lld support --fatal-warnings. Should the compiler driver add this flag when `-Werror` is given? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44573] New: [NewPM] InstCombine always run with ExpensiveCombines enabled
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44573 Bug ID: 44573 Summary: [NewPM] InstCombine always run with ExpensiveCombines enabled Product: libraries Version: trunk Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P Component: Scalar Optimizations Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: nikita@gmail.com CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org NewPM always adds InstCombine in default configuration, which means that ExpensiveCombines is enabled: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/53b68e676faf208b4a8f817e9bd4ddd522cc6006/llvm/lib/Passes/PassBuilder.cpp#L436 Legacy PM only enabled ExpensiveCombines at O3: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/53b68e676faf208b4a8f817e9bd4ddd522cc6006/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.cpp#L247-L251 I'm assuming that this discrepancy is not intentional. Originally mentioned on https://reviews.llvm.org/D72861. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44574] New: [NewPM] SpeculativeExecutionPass is run on all targets
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44574 Bug ID: 44574 Summary: [NewPM] SpeculativeExecutionPass is run on all targets Product: libraries Version: trunk Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P Component: Scalar Optimizations Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: nikita@gmail.com CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, spatel+l...@rotateright.com As pointed out by @spatel on https://reviews.llvm.org/D72861, with NewPM the SpeculativeExecutionPass is executed on all targets, even if the target doesn't have branch divergence. New PM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/53b68e676faf208b4a8f817e9bd4ddd522cc6006/llvm/lib/Passes/PassBuilder.cpp#L427 Legacy PM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/53b68e676faf208b4a8f817e9bd4ddd522cc6006/llvm/lib/Transforms/IPO/PassManagerBuilder.cpp#L342 As the new PM pass builder retains the comment that this is a nop on targets without branch divergence, this is probably an oversight. The `false` parameter to the pass constructor is missing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44575] New: Switch to using C11 thread implementation on Fuchsia
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44575 Bug ID: 44575 Summary: Switch to using C11 thread implementation on Fuchsia Product: libc++ Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P Component: All Bugs Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org Reporter: pho...@chromium.org CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, mclow.li...@gmail.com C11 thread is the native implementation on Fuchsia with pthread being an emulation on top. libc++ already has C11 thread support since ab9aefe, but it turned out that mtx_t support for recursive mutexes in Fuchsia needs to be improved so we cannot switch to it yet. Once that blocker is cleared, we should switch Fuchsia to use C11 thread implementation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
[llvm-bugs] [Bug 44576] New: Merge caee96031d3be9f951e4a17c8d3fb1c8b748fb31 to 10.0 branch
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44576 Bug ID: 44576 Summary: Merge caee96031d3be9f951e4a17c8d3fb1c8b748fb31 to 10.0 branch Product: libraries Version: 10.0 Hardware: PC OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P Component: Transformation Utilities Assignee: unassignedb...@nondot.org Reporter: craig.top...@gmail.com CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org This removes a "using namespace llvm" from a header. This using statement can cause conflicts with symbols in other projects when llvm is used as a library. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.___ llvm-bugs mailing list llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
