[PATCH] D98694: [-Wcalled-once-parameter] Fix false positives for cleanup attr

NoQ accepted this revision. NoQ added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D98694/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D98694 ___ cfe-co

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

lxfind added a comment. > Here what I want to say is we **shouldn't** handle all the symmetric > transfer from the above analysis. And we shouldn't change the ASTNodes and > Sema part. We need to solve about the above pattern. It is not easy to give a > solution since user could implement symm

[PATCH] D98688: [-Wcalled-once-parameter] Harden analysis in terms of block use

NoQ added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/AnalysisBasedWarnings.cpp:1729 + handleBlockThatIsGuaranteedToBeCalledOnce(const BlockDecl *Block) override { +Data.flushWarnings(Block, S); + } Do i understand correctly that you're relying on the order

[PATCH] D98757: [AMX] Not fold constant bitcast into amx intrisic

clin1 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/lib/Analysis/ConstantFolding.cpp:101 /// Constant fold bitcast, symbolically evaluating it with DataLayout. /// This always returns a non-null constant, but it may be a /// ConstantExpr if unfoldable. API for this

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

lxfind added a comment. Well, I guess another potential solution is to force emitting lifetime intrinsics for this part of coroutine in the front-end. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D98638/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D98638 __

[PATCH] D98757: [AMX] Not fold constant bitcast into amx intrisic

LuoYuanke added a comment. > at clang/test/CodeGen/X86/amx_api.c Probably we need a .ll test case to for constant folding. Comment at: llvm/lib/Analysis/ConstantFolding.cpp:108 + // We won't fold bitcast for tile type, becasue there is no way to + // assigne a tmm reg from

[PATCH] D98757: [AMX] Not fold constant bitcast into amx intrisic

xiangzhangllvm added a comment. In D98757#2630844 , @LuoYuanke wrote: > Probably we need a .ll test case to for constant folding. Fold constant is done in CSE and SCCP which are both passes run in Clang (O2 )

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

ChuanqiXu added a comment. In D98638#2630778 , @lxfind wrote: > What do you think is the fundamental problem, though? It is hard to give a formal description for the problem. Let me try to explain it. What I want to say here is about rules that decide wh

[PATCH] D93594: [X86] Pass to transform amx intrinsics to scalar operation.

LuoYuanke added a comment. I can reproduce the regression. I'll help to fix it. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D93594/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D93594 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-c

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

lxfind added a comment. > Then we need to answer the question: how can we **prove** that the result of > symmetric transfer and %gro are the **only** exceptions from the above rules. > Or how can we know the list of exceptions wouldn't get longer and longer in > the future? > > Then go back to

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

lxfind added a comment. > Then if we want to put the result of the await_suspend in the stack, I think > we can do it under CodeGen part only. It should be easy to judge the return > type of await_suspend and create a call to llvm.coro.forcestack to the return > value of await_suspend. We prob

[PATCH] D98726: [analyzer] Remove unnecessary TODO

RedDocMD updated this revision to Diff 331164. RedDocMD added a comment. Removed unnecessary include Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D98726/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D98726 Files: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/SmartPtrModeli

[PATCH] D98757: [AMX] Not fold constant bitcast into amx intrisic

clin1 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/lib/Analysis/ConstantFolding.cpp:101 /// Constant fold bitcast, symbolically evaluating it with DataLayout. /// This always returns a non-null constant, but it may be a /// ConstantExpr if unfoldable. xiangzhangllv

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

ChuanqiXu added a comment. In D98638#2630864 , @lxfind wrote: > That's a fair point. I agree that we have no guarantee these are the only two > cases. > It does seem to me that coroutine implementation somewhat relies on proper > lifetime markers so that

[PATCH] D98757: [AMX] Not fold constant bitcast into amx intrisic

xiangzhangllvm added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/lib/Analysis/ConstantFolding.cpp:101 /// Constant fold bitcast, symbolically evaluating it with DataLayout. /// This always returns a non-null constant, but it may be a /// ConstantExpr if unfoldable. clin

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

ChuanqiXu added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCoroutine.cpp:221 CGF.EmitBlock(RealSuspendBlock); + } else if (ForcestackStart) { +Builder.CreateCall( ChuanqiXu wrote: > can we rewrite it into: > ``` > else if (SuspendRet != nullptr &&

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

lxfind added a comment. > Can't we did as inline comments? No, because it would have already been too late. SuspendExpr returns the result of __builtin_coro_resume(awaiter.await_suspend().address()), which is different from the result of awaiter.await_suspend(). We need to be able to control th

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

lxfind added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCoroutine.cpp:221 CGF.EmitBlock(RealSuspendBlock); + } else if (ForcestackStart) { +Builder.CreateCall( ChuanqiXu wrote: > ChuanqiXu wrote: > > can we rewrite it into: > > ``` > > else if (Su

[PATCH] D98638: [RFC][Coroutine] Force stack allocation after await_suspend() call

ChuanqiXu added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCoroutine.cpp:221 CGF.EmitBlock(RealSuspendBlock); + } else if (ForcestackStart) { +Builder.CreateCall( lxfind wrote: > ChuanqiXu wrote: > > ChuanqiXu wrote: > > > can we rewrite it into:

<    1   2   3