llvm-ci wrote:
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder `clang-hip-vega20` running
on `hip-vega20-0` while building `clang` at step 3 "annotate".
Full details are available at:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/123/builds/4907
Here is the relevant piece of the build log for
https://github.com/efriedma-quic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107154
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/rnk updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107154
>From cfb2cea5a4d4e0c1712e038692c4c5acee6b1f27 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Reid Kleckner
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 21:16:40 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [MS] Put dllexported inline global initializers in a
comdat
Foll
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff 24b6b82487f15dd9d6cbe8a716dd13a6808a2528
3cb368a8c01f99a7b12ece55e5b2145650d4f89d --e
rnk wrote:
Yeah, I should've explicitly said I was working on updating the comment block.
It needed significant surgery. Actually, this code could probably use more
significant refactoring, but let's set that aside for now.
> Does this impact non-MS targets?
At the moment, I can't think of a
https://github.com/rnk updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107154
>From cfb2cea5a4d4e0c1712e038692c4c5acee6b1f27 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Reid Kleckner
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 21:16:40 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [MS] Put dllexported inline global initializers in a
comdat
Foll
efriedma-quic wrote:
If there isn't a way to emit conforming code, then I think it's fine to emit
non-conforming code, as long as there's an appropriate comment. Breaking the
ABI is clearly worse.
Does this impact non-MS targets?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107154
_
rnk wrote:
I think there is no change here in our conformance on inline variable
initialization order, except that non-discardable inline variables (achieved in
this instance with dllexport, but perhaps there are other ways to do this. The
classic case is explicit instantiation, which is unord
efriedma-quic wrote:
What's the interaction here with the standard's ordering guarantees? The
comment in the code indicates that we can't make a separate comdat for ordered
initialization... but inline variables do require partial ordering. Please
update the comment as appropriate.
https://
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Reid Kleckner (rnk)
Changes
Follow-up to c19f4f8069722f6804086d4438a0254104242c46 to handle corner case of
exported inline variables.
Should fix #56485
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107154.diff
2 Files Affect
https://github.com/rnk created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107154
Follow-up to c19f4f8069722f6804086d4438a0254104242c46 to handle corner case of
exported inline variables.
Should fix #56485
>From cfb2cea5a4d4e0c1712e038692c4c5acee6b1f27 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Reid Kleckne
11 matches
Mail list logo
