https://github.com/xgupta closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95695
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Shivam Gupta
Date: 2024-07-25T12:22:40+05:30
New Revision: 26b70707fc2cc0ab8883e6492a4808401a6a4bad
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/26b70707fc2cc0ab8883e6492a4808401a6a4bad
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/26b70707fc2cc0ab8883e6492a4808401a6a4bad.diff
https://github.com/PeterChou1 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: PeterChou1
Date: 2024-07-25T02:03:20-04:00
New Revision: 1b7631a699e6af7f497548a1ceb5be0570c60ed0
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/1b7631a699e6af7f497548a1ceb5be0570c60ed0
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/1b7631a699e6af7f497548a1ceb5be0570c60ed0.diff
LO
Author: Chen Zheng
Date: 2024-07-25T13:46:59+08:00
New Revision: 25482b356e51de1f259b3ac7c785ab34977781b4
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/25482b356e51de1f259b3ac7c785ab34977781b4
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/25482b356e51de1f259b3ac7c785ab34977781b4.diff
LO
https://github.com/chenzheng1030 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97541
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/chenzheng1030 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97541
>From 95b653b6a8f65c04eda610761e52772cb4f8ba35 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chen Zheng
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 04:42:25 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] [PowerPC] add TargetParser for PPC target For now only focus
o
BeMg wrote:
> @BeMg Can you rebase over commit
> [d1e28e2](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d1e28e2a7bd4642e6a5ec963a5ca2ad2ba1b2b59)?
Now this patch rebase over
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d1e28e2a7bd4642e6a5ec963a5ca2ad2ba1b2b59.
Majorly, the diff between origin p
https://github.com/BeMg updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85786
>From 708c81609c603c5ea820493e92d8c82cf4620d64 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Piyou Chen
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 19:59:06 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [RISCV][FMV] Support target_clones
---
.../clang/Basic/DiagnosticF
https://github.com/njames93 approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100461
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Timm Bäder
Date: 2024-07-25T06:45:48+02:00
New Revision: 8608cc1c89640bd3d8120f24c964af21310253b6
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8608cc1c89640bd3d8120f24c964af21310253b6
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8608cc1c89640bd3d8120f24c964af21310253b6.diff
LO
llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder `llvm-x86_64-debian-dylib`
running on `gribozavr4` while building `clang-tools-extra` at step 9
"test-build-unified-tree-check-clang-extra".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/60/builds/330
rprichard wrote:
The previous `llvm_check_compiler_linker_flag` passes the same flag to both the
compile step and the linker step. Apparently, it's like a combined
`check_compiler_flag` and `check_linker_flag`. CMake apparently doesn't
implement this directly
(https://stackoverflow.com/questi
https://github.com/owenca closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93140
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Gedare Bloom
Date: 2024-07-24T19:47:11-07:00
New Revision: ccae7b461be339e717d02f99ac857cf0bc7d17fc
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ccae7b461be339e717d02f99ac857cf0bc7d17fc
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ccae7b461be339e717d02f99ac857cf0bc7d17fc.diff
@@ -94,14 +94,15 @@ entry:
;
; MMX Store
+; Note: doesn't actually emit a non-temporal store here.
;
define void @test_mmx(ptr nocapture %a0, ptr nocapture %a1) {
; ALL-LABEL: test_mmx:
; ALL: # %bb.0: # %entry
; ALL-NEXT:movq (%rdi), %mm0
; ALL-NEXT:psrl
llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder `llvm-x86_64-debian-dylib`
running on `gribozavr4` while building `clang` at step 6
"test-build-unified-tree-check-clang".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/60/builds/3284
Here is the rel
Author: Owen Pan
Date: 2024-07-24T19:33:44-07:00
New Revision: 7e7a9069d4240d2ae619cb50eba09f948c537ce3
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7e7a9069d4240d2ae619cb50eba09f948c537ce3
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7e7a9069d4240d2ae619cb50eba09f948c537ce3.diff
LOG:
https://github.com/chenzheng1030 commented:
```
def FeatureFPU : SubtargetFeature<"fpu","HasFPU","true",
"Enable classic FPU instructions",
[FeatureHardFloat]>;
def FeatureAltivec : SubtargetFeature<"altivec",
rprichard wrote:
> This check in libcxx/cmake/config-ix.cmake seems to break:
>
> ```
> check_cxx_compiler_flag(-nostdlib++ CXX_SUPPORTS_NOSTDLIBXX_FLAG)
> ```
This particular check was already using `check_cxx_compiler_flag` before this
PR, so it was broken(?), but it apparently doesn't matte
@@ -692,23 +692,22 @@ static RValue emitLibraryCall(CodeGenFunction &CGF, const
FunctionDecl *FD,
RValue Call =
CGF.EmitCall(E->getCallee()->getType(), callee, E, ReturnValueSlot());
- // Check the supported intrinsic.
+ ASTContext &Context = CGF.getContext();
if
https://github.com/MaxEW707 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99833
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -692,23 +692,22 @@ static RValue emitLibraryCall(CodeGenFunction &CGF, const
FunctionDecl *FD,
RValue Call =
CGF.EmitCall(E->getCallee()->getType(), callee, E, ReturnValueSlot());
- // Check the supported intrinsic.
+ ASTContext &Context = CGF.getContext();
if
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Mike Rice (mikerice1969)
Changes
Fix static verifer concerns of null pointer checks after dereferencing
the pointer. Update the assert to make it super clear it is not null and
remove the checks.
https://github.com/mikerice1969 created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100489
Fix static verifer concerns of null pointer checks after dereferencing
the pointer. Update the assert to make it super clear it is not null and
remove the checks.
Michael137 wrote:
> It looks like this is working for all other kinds of structured binding
> because `EmitDeclare(BindingDecl*, ...)` emits a proper `DILocalVariable` for
> them. But it skips `BindingDecl`s that have a holding variable for some
> reason. Perhaps a cleaner approach would be to
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+// RUN: rm -rf %t && mkdir %t
+// RUN: cp "%s" "%t/test.cpp"
PeterChou1 wrote:
Sorry, the reason why I kept using this pattern is because I copied the same
test setups in the original test for clang-doc
[here](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-proje
rprichard wrote:
This check in libcxx/cmake/config-ix.cmake seems to break:
```
check_cxx_compiler_flag(-nostdlib++ CXX_SUPPORTS_NOSTDLIBXX_FLAG)
```
It appears that it isn't passing either `-nostdlib++` or `-lc++` to the clang
linker command-line, but then `-lc++` _is_ passed to `ld.lld` becau
https://github.com/PeterChou1 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93281
>From f3eec972f66576fdacc578eaea3f158efdf57128 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: PeterChou1
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 04:28:08 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/13] clang-doc switched from using relative to absolute
paths
zygoloid wrote:
It looks like this is working for all other kinds of structured binding because
`EmitDeclare(BindingDecl*, ...)` emits a proper `DILocalVariable` for them. But
it skips `BindingDecl`s that have a holding variable for some reason. Perhaps a
cleaner approach would be to make it h
rprichard wrote:
> I was waiting for your recent PRs to land, but the android failures seem to
> persist even after them.
Yeah that's also what I noticed. My PRs were aimed at getting the Android
Dockerfile buildable again, but once it was buildable, the feature testing
failed.
It _seemed_ t
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+// RUN: rm -rf %t && mkdir %t
+// RUN: cp "%s" "%t/test.cpp"
ilovepi wrote:
Looks like I missed this. Please don’t copy the test file around. To be blunt
this pattern has been brought up in multiple PRs and even in previous
incarnations of this
https://github.com/PeterChou1 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93281
>From f3eec972f66576fdacc578eaea3f158efdf57128 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: PeterChou1
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 04:28:08 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/12] clang-doc switched from using relative to absolute
paths
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Seems sensible @cor3ntin wdyt?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100142
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Thank you for this PR, could please put a little more detail in the summary
since that is what will be seen by folks using git log.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100351
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-
https://github.com/PeterChou1 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ilovepi wrote:
Hmm, seems like tests are failing. PTAL.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93281
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/PeterChou1 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+// RUN: rm -rf %t && mkdir %t
+// RUN: cp "%s" "%t/test.cpp"
+// RUN: clang-doc --format=html --executor=standalone -p %s --output=%t
+// RUN: FileCheck %s -input-file=%t/index_json.js -check-prefix=JSON-INDEX
+// RUN: rm -rf %t
+
+// JSON-INDEX: var RootPath = "
https://github.com/ilovepi approved this pull request.
LGTM, but can we improve the check for RootPath somehow? I feel like there
should be something we can match there.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93281
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe
https://github.com/ilovepi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93281
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/PeterChou1 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
>From 761d1b65063a1d91b1bcedee19798ae7fed8d07b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: PeterChou1
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 20:27:31 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/15] remove USR
---
clang-tools-extra/clang-doc/HTMLGenerator.
https://github.com/PeterChou1 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
>From 761d1b65063a1d91b1bcedee19798ae7fed8d07b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: PeterChou1
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 20:27:31 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/14] remove USR
---
clang-tools-extra/clang-doc/HTMLGenerator.
llvmbot wrote:
/pull-request llvm/llvm-project#100484
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100480
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/PeterChou1 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93281
>From f3eec972f66576fdacc578eaea3f158efdf57128 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: PeterChou1
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 04:28:08 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/11] clang-doc switched from using relative to absolute
paths
https://github.com/Michael137 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100355
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/asl milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100480
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
asl wrote:
/cherry-pick 3f6eb13abf643afec17a73448ede380606531226
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100480
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Michael137 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100355
>From 2b1255de05856e4c79f58d3e4071384ba80a881d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Buch
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 16:26:16 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang][Sema] Don't mark VarDecls of bindings in
tuple-li
https://github.com/kovdan01 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100480
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Daniil Kovalev
Date: 2024-07-25T02:13:30+03:00
New Revision: 3f6eb13abf643afec17a73448ede380606531226
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/3f6eb13abf643afec17a73448ede380606531226
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/3f6eb13abf643afec17a73448ede380606531226.diff
Michael137 wrote:
Updated the PR and description with the alternative approach
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100355
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Michael137 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100355
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
h-vetinari wrote:
> It seems that the Android support in the Dockerfile is broken after a
> refactor last year. I have some changes that get it working again.
I was waiting for your recent PRs to land, but the android failures seem to
persist even after them.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-pro
https://github.com/Michael137 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100355
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Michael137 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100355
>From 2b1255de05856e4c79f58d3e4071384ba80a881d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Buch
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 16:26:16 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang][Sema] Don't mark VarDecls of bindings in
tuple-li
ilovepi wrote:
Oh, can you also update the title and commit message? You're not really adding
a short circuit, you're just memoizing visited items, and avoiding reprocessing
them.
A bit more context, and a summary of your findings on the changes to output
would also be good to have in the com
ilovepi wrote:
Seems to be a formatting issue. `git clang-format` should fix it.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
mizvekov wrote:
I don't believe we currently have any code coverage at all for the line
affected.
So with this change, which we don't fully understand, we could be breaking
currently working code, and we could not even be fixing the known broken cases,
as there could be further UB down the li
https://github.com/PeterChou1 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93281
>From f3eec972f66576fdacc578eaea3f158efdf57128 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: PeterChou1
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 04:28:08 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/10] clang-doc switched from using relative to absolute
paths
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fcxx-exceptions -verify %s
+
+#pragma clang diagnostic ignored "-Wperf-constraint-implies-noexcept"
+
+// Objective-C
+@interface OCClass
+- (void)method;
+@end
+
+void nl14(OCClass *oc) [[clang::nonblocking]] {
+
@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fcxx-exceptions -verify %s
+// These are in a separate file because errors (e.g. incompatible attributes)
currently prevent
+// the AnalysisBasedWarnings pass from running at all.
+
+// This diagnostic is re-enabled an
@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fcxx-exceptions -verify %s
+// These are in a separate file because errors (e.g. incompatible attributes)
currently prevent
+// the AnalysisBasedWarnings pass from running at all.
+
+// This diagnostic is re-enabled an
alexfh wrote:
> Can you please add a reference to #100095 in the summary so folks just
> reading the git log have more context w/o going to the commit itself.
>
> I would like to see a more flushed out long-term plan for fixing this
> properly but I think it makes sense.
I've added more detai
https://github.com/a-tarasyuk updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99308
>From 39de759ac60f2f06953ebe32392c25837ba591f1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oleksandr T
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 14:21:31 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Clang] fix assertion failure in invalid delete operator
de
https://github.com/alexfh edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100408
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/asl approved this pull request.
Thanks!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100480
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -159,6 +159,20 @@ AMDGPU Support
X86 Support
^^^
+- The MMX vector intrinsic functions from ``*mmintrin.h`` which
+ operate on `__m64` vectors, such as ``_mm_add_pi8``, have been
+ reimplemented to use the SSE2 instruction-set and XMM registers
+ unconditionally.
https://github.com/a-tarasyuk updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97860
>From cb3c677c9eb10998ed7357cdde2722f3b3c1c847 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oleksandr T
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2024 00:24:06 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Clang] prevent checking destructor reference with an
invali
Author: James Y Knight
Date: 2024-07-24T18:39:16-04:00
New Revision: b79568654e38a14ef921af932ed96abd8961b1ed
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/b79568654e38a14ef921af932ed96abd8961b1ed
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/b79568654e38a14ef921af932ed96abd8961b1ed.diff
https://github.com/jroelofs edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99656
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fcxx-exceptions -verify %s
+// These are in a separate file because errors (e.g. incompatible attributes)
currently prevent
+// the AnalysisBasedWarnings pass from running at all.
+
+// This diagnostic is re-enabled an
@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fcxx-exceptions -verify %s
+// These are in a separate file because errors (e.g. incompatible attributes)
currently prevent
+// the AnalysisBasedWarnings pass from running at all.
+
+// This diagnostic is re-enabled an
@@ -0,0 +1,194 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fcxx-exceptions -verify %s
+// These are in a separate file because errors (e.g. incompatible attributes)
currently prevent
+// the AnalysisBasedWarnings pass from running at all.
+
+// This diagnostic is re-enabled an
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-driver
Author: Daniil Kovalev (kovdan01)
Changes
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100480.diff
2 Files Affected:
- (modified) clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp (+4)
- (modified) clang/test
@@ -152,48 +152,38 @@ void tools::PS4cpu::Linker::ConstructJob(Compilation &C,
const JobAction &JA,
CmdArgs.push_back(Output.getFilename());
}
- const bool UseLTO = D.isUsingLTO();
const bool UseJMC =
Args.hasFlag(options::OPT_fjmc, options::OPT_fno_jmc, fals
https://github.com/kovdan01 created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100480
None
>From b6604c33428a6c0e337212a0e33fbb85d2687a97 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniil Kovalev
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 01:27:47 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] [PAC][clang] Enable `-fptrauth-indirect-gotos` as part o
https://github.com/playstation-edd updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100423
>From daa53d8cf7850a4bb11a7780410b969602138565 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Edd Dawson
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 16:39:09 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [PS4/PS5][Driver] Always pass LTO options to the linker
mizvekov wrote:
> That said... an example like the following sidesteps all these issues and
> still crashes clang, so I think the above comments are somewhat orthogonal to
> this patch (except that I think we should have something like this as a test
> case instead of the current test case):
>
Michael137 wrote:
> Thanks for the patch!
>
> I would actually prefer option 2 here.
>
> `isImplicit` has other uses - namely for AST matchers and refactoring tools
> that also rely on knowing whether something was spelled in source.
>
> Note that I cannot comment on what make sense for debug
@@ -243,6 +243,7 @@ Example usage for a project using a compile commands
database:
// Fail early if an invalid format was provided.
std::string Format = getFormatString();
+ llvm::outs() << "Unoptimized\n";
ilovepi wrote:
nit: leftover from debugging?
https://github.com/ilovepi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ilovepi approved this pull request.
If we can confirm that the only differences in documentation generation are due
to ordering, then I think it makes sense to land this patch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96809
___
cfe
@@ -5824,12 +5824,23 @@ FunctionDecl
*Sema::getMoreConstrainedFunction(FunctionDecl *FD1,
FunctionDecl *FD2) {
assert(!FD1->getDescribedTemplate() && !FD2->getDescribedTemplate() &&
"not for function templates");
- Fun
zygoloid wrote:
Hmm. See https://lists.isocpp.org/core/2024/06/15952.php -- I think we should
never be comparing constraints between functions whose signatures aren't
otherwise the same, and in particular we should never compare the constraints
of a conversion function template against the con
@@ -4699,7 +4699,7 @@ class FunctionEffect {
private:
LLVM_PREFERRED_TYPE(Kind)
- unsigned FKind : 3;
+ uint8_t FKind : 3;
jroelofs wrote:
also, github won't let me comment on the correct lines, but:
```
- FunctionEffect() : FKind(unsigned(Kind::None))
@@ -4699,7 +4699,7 @@ class FunctionEffect {
private:
LLVM_PREFERRED_TYPE(Kind)
- unsigned FKind : 3;
+ uint8_t FKind : 3;
jroelofs wrote:
I'd split this into it's own NFC PR, and land it before the rest.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/99656
_
https://github.com/andykaylor updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100453
>From cf7bf482e7ce11f0ca1add4b0bb62a327ac56b71 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andy Kaylor
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:34:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Driver] Introduce ffp-model=aggressive
This change modifi
@@ -10339,24 +10339,53 @@ Sema::CheckMemberSpecialization(NamedDecl *Member,
LookupResult &Previous) {
if (Previous.empty()) {
// Nowhere to look anyway.
} else if (FunctionDecl *Function = dyn_cast(Member)) {
+SmallVector Candidates;
+bool Ambiguous = false;
shafik wrote:
> The structure of the AST is not stable but whoever change is would have to
> fix the code anyway as it's all the same project so it's a non-issue (as long
> as you add sufficient test coverage)
I agree relying on the AST is fine w/ sufficient testing.
https://github.com/llvm/
@@ -8001,6 +8001,12 @@ NamedDecl *Sema::ActOnVariableDeclarator(
}
}
+ if (getLangOpts().HLSL) {
+if (R->isHLSLSpecificType() && !NewVD->isImplicit()) {
+ Diag(D.getBeginLoc(), diag::err_hlsl_intangible_type_cannot_be_declared);
hekota wrote:
https://github.com/hekota edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97362
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/hekota edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97362
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
jdoerfert wrote:
I think we can/should go with the "--offload" set of flags, and potentially
have an "--offload-targets=..." version that clang is missing. The latter is
mostly not needed, as --offload-arch=..." is pretty good, but there are cases
you want to make it explicit to pass on additi
@@ -159,6 +159,20 @@ AMDGPU Support
X86 Support
^^^
+- The MMX vector intrinsic functions from ``*mmintrin.h`` which
+ operate on `__m64` vectors, such as ``_mm_add_pi8``, have been
+ reimplemented to use the SSE2 instruction-set and XMM registers
+ unconditionally.
https://github.com/kovdan01 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100206
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Daniil Kovalev
Date: 2024-07-25T00:24:50+03:00
New Revision: 70c6e79e6d3e897418f3556a25e22e66ff018dc4
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/70c6e79e6d3e897418f3556a25e22e66ff018dc4
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/70c6e79e6d3e897418f3556a25e22e66ff018dc4.diff
kovdan01 wrote:
Buildkite failures look unrelated, so merging
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100206
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/shafik commented:
Can you please add a reference to
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/100095 in the summary so folks just
reading the git log have more context w/o going to the commit itself.
I would like to see a more flushed out long-term plan for fixing this pro
@@ -1333,6 +1333,15 @@ def Experimental
: SubtargetFeature<"experimental", "HasExperimental",
"true", "Experimental intrinsics">;
+def FeatureABIVLen32B
topperc wrote:
Can we put this in the frontend's CodeGenOpts instead of using fea
1 - 100 of 468 matches
Mail list logo
