@@ -294,18 +297,49 @@ CodeGenTBAA::CollectFields(uint64_t BaseOffset,
return false;
const ASTRecordLayout &Layout = Context.getASTRecordLayout(RD);
+const CGRecordLayout &CGRL = CGTypes.getCGRecordLayout(RD);
unsigned idx = 0;
-for (RecordDecl::field
overmighty wrote:
Maybe the semantic analysis and docs should have been changed to match GCC's
better.
GCC's docs say their `__builtin_popcountg` takes a "type-generic unsigned
integer" but that "No integral argument promotions are performed on the
argument." Our builtin accepts signed intege
@@ -1128,9 +1122,11 @@ void CodeGenPGO::emitMCDCParameters(CGBuilderTy
&Builder) {
// Emit intrinsic representing MCDC bitmap parameters at function entry.
// This is used by the instrumentation pass, but it isn't actually lowered to
// anything.
- llvm::Value *Args[3]
@@ -1201,19 +1197,22 @@ void CodeGenPGO::emitMCDCCondBitmapUpdate(CGBuilderTy
&Builder, const Expr *S,
// Extract the ID of the condition we are setting in the bitmap.
const auto &Branch = BranchStateIter->second;
assert(Branch.ID >= 0 && "Condition has no ID!");
+ asse
efriedma-quic wrote:
Oh, I should have caught that when reviewing. (I thought I checked the test
was doing the right thing when I looked at it, but I guess I'm misremembering.)
Probably need to mark the intrinsic CustomTypeChecking, then make the code in
SemaChecking explicitly perform lvalue
@@ -0,0 +1,167 @@
+//===--- UnsafeCrtpCheck.cpp - clang-tidy
-===//
+//
+// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM
Exceptions.
+// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: Ap
https://github.com/efriedma-quic commented:
Whitespace is weird in a few places; otherwise looks fine.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82922
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listin
dwblaikie wrote:
+1 to @pogo59's comment about pruning complete paths - I suspect they're in the
minority. Might be worth checking whether the `===` at the start and end is
markup for any particular thing (I /think/ the `-*- C++ -*-` is load bearing
for some editors to inform them this `.h` fi
@@ -24,4 +24,9 @@ def int_dx_dot :
Intrinsic<[LLVMVectorElementType<0>],
[llvm_anyvector_ty, LLVMScalarOrSameVectorWidth<0,
LLVMVectorElementType<0>>],
[IntrNoMem, IntrWillReturn, Commutative] >;
+
+def int_dx_lerp :
+Intrinsic<[LLVMMatchType<0>],
+[llvm_
overmighty wrote:
Thanks. I plan to fix it soon, so I will probably just open a PR then.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82359
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
PiJoules wrote:
> > Do you know a libc implementation that actually implements `%k` `%r` and
> > who are the potential users? From a quick glance, gcc avr supports
> > fixed-point types but avr-libc doesn't seem to support %k %r.
>
> LLVM-libc will support them soon, PR should be coming next w
michaelrj-google wrote:
This patch looks fine from my end, but I was wondering: Does clang do warnings
for printf flags that don't apply to a specific conversion? As an example, in
the format specifier `"%+R"` is technically undefined since the `+` flag only
applies to signed conversions. In
@@ -120,6 +120,10 @@ Non-comprehensive list of changes in this release
New Compiler Flags
--
+- ``-Wmissing-designated-field-initializers``, grouped under
``-Wmissing-designated-field-initializers``.
shafik wrote:
CC @AaronBallman
https://g
PiJoules wrote:
> This patch looks fine from my end, but I was wondering: Does clang do
> warnings for printf flags that don't apply to a specific conversion? As an
> example, in the format specifier `"%+R"` is technically undefined since the
> `+` flag only applies to signed conversions. In p
https://github.com/PiJoules updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82855
>From 42d128e1a2bc6b00a8aa5393c763de4f17935068 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Leonard Chan
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 16:57:58 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] [clang] Update -Wformat warnings for fixed-point format
specifie
Author: Egor Zhdan
Date: 2024-02-27T00:37:15Z
New Revision: 5e4c4365f89b7b31ee3868114dd0f6c5d483e42b
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5e4c4365f89b7b31ee3868114dd0f6c5d483e42b
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/5e4c4365f89b7b31ee3868114dd0f6c5d483e42b.diff
LOG: [A
https://github.com/egorzhdan closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83057
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/wsmoses updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83059
>From c01b559836ca62648c5f95a6441888514347a1ea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "William S. Moses"
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 16:17:55 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Clang][HTO] Add clang attribute for propagating
llvm-l
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -debug-info-kind=limited -emit-llvm -o - | FileCheck %s
+
+void t1() __attribute__((llvm_fn_attr("custom_attr", "custom_value"),
llvm_fn_attr("second_attr", "second_value")));
+
+void t1()
+{
+}
+
+void t2();
+
+void t3() {
+ t2() at
https://github.com/dwblaikie approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82840
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -370,11 +370,22 @@ namespace llvm {
/// G8RC = TLSGD_AIX, TOC_ENTRY, TOC_ENTRY
/// Op that combines two register copies of TOC entries
/// (region handle into R3 and variable offset into R4) followed by a
-/// GET_TLS_ADDR node which will be expanded to a cal
https://github.com/HerrCai0907 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78598
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zyn0217 wrote:
Could you please explain why you're closing the PR?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78598
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83093
D57497 added -msmall-data-limit= as an alias for -G and defaulted it to 8 for
-fno-pic/-fpie.
The behavior is already different from GCC in a few ways:
* GCC doesn't accept -G.
* GCC -fpie doesn't seem to use -m
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-driver
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-risc-v
Author: Fangrui Song (MaskRay)
Changes
D57497 added -msmall-data-limit= as an alias for -G and defaulted it to 8 for
-fno-pic/-fpie.
The behavior is already different from GCC i
https://github.com/wsmoses updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83059
>From c01b559836ca62648c5f95a6441888514347a1ea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "William S. Moses"
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 16:17:55 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Clang][HTO] Add clang attribute for propagating
llvm-l
https://github.com/ChuanqiXu9 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80976
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ChuanqiXu9 commented:
+1 that we should reduce the impact of the patch as much as possible.
Also every time we change the data member of decls and stmts, we need to update
the serialization part.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80976
__
@@ -1474,6 +1478,16 @@ class VarDecl : public DeclaratorDecl, public
Redeclarable {
NonParmVarDeclBits.ExceptionVar = EV;
}
+ /// Determine the Ellipsis (...) or not
+ bool isEllipsisVariable() const {
+return isa(this) ? false : NonParmVarDeclBits.EllipsisVar;
+
@@ -115,6 +115,10 @@ void JSONNodeDumper::Visit(const Decl *D) {
else if (D->isThisDeclarationReferenced())
JOS.attribute("isReferenced", true);
+ if (const VarDecl *ND = dyn_cast(D))
+ if (ND->isEllipsisVariable())
+ JOS.attribute("catch_all", true);
@@ -1053,6 +1053,10 @@ class VarDecl : public DeclaratorDecl, public
Redeclarable {
LLVM_PREFERRED_TYPE(bool)
unsigned ExceptionVar : 1;
+/// To Check the ellipsis
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
The comment is not clear
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/p
@@ -2698,9 +2698,16 @@ StmtResult Parser::ParseCXXCatchBlock(bool FnCatch) {
Declarator ExDecl(DS, Attributes, DeclaratorContext::CXXCatch);
ParseDeclarator(ExDecl);
ExceptionDecl = Actions.ActOnExceptionDeclarator(getCurScope(), ExDecl);
- } else
-ConsumeToken
@@ -16983,7 +16983,7 @@ VarDecl *Sema::BuildExceptionDeclaration(Scope *S,
/// ActOnExceptionDeclarator - Parsed the exception-declarator in a C++ catch
/// handler.
-Decl *Sema::ActOnExceptionDeclarator(Scope *S, Declarator &D) {
+Decl *Sema::ActOnExceptionDeclarator(Scope *S
@@ -271,6 +271,9 @@ void TextNodeDumper::Visit(const Decl *D) {
OS << " hidden";
if (D->isImplicit())
OS << " implicit";
+ if (const VarDecl *ND = dyn_cast(D))
+ if (ND->isEllipsisVariable())
+ OS << " catch_all";
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
ditto
https:
@@ -1053,6 +1053,10 @@ class VarDecl : public DeclaratorDecl, public
Redeclarable {
LLVM_PREFERRED_TYPE(bool)
unsigned ExceptionVar : 1;
+/// To Check the ellipsis
+LLVM_PREFERRED_TYPE(bool)
+unsigned EllipsisVar : 1;
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
Sh
@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ void TestCatch2() {
try {
}
// CHECK-NEXT:CXXCatchStmt
-// CHECK-NEXT: NULL
+// CHECK-NEXT: VarDecl {{.*}} ''
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
Maybe we can improve to print this.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80976
___
https://github.com/chapuni edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82448
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/chapuni edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82448
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
@rjmccall @dwblaikie
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75912
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/wangpc-pp approved this pull request.
LGTM.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82152
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -10722,6 +10723,20 @@ static bool getVectorCompareInfo(SDValue Intrin, int
&CompareOpc,
return true;
}
+bool isContiguousMask(const APInt &Val, unsigned &MB, unsigned &ME,
chenzheng1030 wrote:
Is it possible to reuse `isRunOfOnes()`/`isRunOfOnes64()` in
@@ -641,6 +641,7 @@ PPCTargetLowering::PPCTargetLowering(const PPCTargetMachine
&TM,
// We want to custom lower some of our intrinsics.
setOperationAction(ISD::INTRINSIC_WO_CHAIN, MVT::Other, Custom);
+ // setOperationAction(ISD::INTRINSIC_WO_CHAIN, MVT::i64, Custom);
--
https://github.com/ymand approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82602
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
chenzheng1030 wrote:
> If you run into issues using normal integer ops, please file bugs. Most
> people aren't going to hand-tune their code like this; builtins like this are
> at best an ugly workaround.
Yes, a user should not try to write source code(using compiler builtins) to
just emit on
https://github.com/rjmccall approved this pull request.
Thanks, that looks great.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81335
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Owen Pan
Date: 2024-02-26T20:46:46-08:00
New Revision: b2a4f64e19247d0553d3dc63af62b652664c3cd6
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/b2a4f64e19247d0553d3dc63af62b652664c3cd6
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/b2a4f64e19247d0553d3dc63af62b652664c3cd6.diff
LOG:
https://github.com/owenca closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82957
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/owenca closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82911
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
owenca wrote:
> > @HighCommander4 I got a better idea. It seems that we don't need to add the
> > parameter! See #82957. I think all you need to do is to call `getStyle()`
> > with the default `""` for the `StringRef Code` argument to skip the
> > Objective-C guesser.
>
> Thanks. That does se
https://github.com/Sirraide created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83103
When analysing whether we should handle a binary expression as an overloaded
operator call or a builtin operator, we were calling
`checkPlaceholderForOverload()`, which takes care of any placeholders that are
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: None (Sirraide)
Changes
When analysing whether we should handle a binary expression as an overloaded
operator call or a builtin operator, we were calling
`checkPlaceholderForOverload()`, which takes care of any placeholders that are
not
brad0 wrote:
@MaskRay
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79116
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Sirraide wrote:
CC @AaronBallman, @cor3ntin
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83103
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+; RUN: llc -march=mips < %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=MIPS32
+; RUN: llc -march=mips64 < %s | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=MIPS64
+
+define dso_local void @read_double(ptr nocapture noundef readonly %0)
local_unnamed_addr #0 {
+ %2 = load double, ptr %0, a
@@ -238,6 +238,9 @@ class LLVM_LIBRARY_VISIBILITY MipsTargetInfo : public
TargetInfo {
case 'd': // Equivalent to "r" unless generating MIPS16 code.
case 'y': // Equivalent to "r", backward compatibility only.
case 'f': // floating-point registers.
+ if (*Name
https://github.com/MaskRay approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79116
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Sirraide wrote:
One more thing: this code seems to not crash and issue a diagnostic just fine
if we simply remove the assertion, so that would also be an option, but I
didn’t simply want to remove an assertion without fully knowing why it’s there,
so I’ve gone with this as an alternative for n
https://github.com/MaskRay updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79116
>From 14ea44a352d547f3c2736f16a47f3dad449446f5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: YunQiang Su
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 18:14:48 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] MIPS/clang: Fix asm constraint for softfloat
This include 2 fi
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79116
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/MaskRay edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79116
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: YunQiang Su
Date: 2024-02-26T22:08:36-08:00
New Revision: c88beb4112d5bbf07d76a615ab7f13ba2ba023e6
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c88beb4112d5bbf07d76a615ab7f13ba2ba023e6
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c88beb4112d5bbf07d76a615ab7f13ba2ba023e6.diff
L
https://github.com/MaskRay closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79116
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/ecnelises updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82968
>From a06fa5e18313ad50019d50006e34a6b8249d95cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Qiu Chaofan
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 16:32:28 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [PowerPC] Add intrinsics for rldimi/rlwimi/rlwnm
These built
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 c67a4ae47c86f1f390db7ba0ea9c021abff130f8
d9c9b4eb91ca3cec0bc469364914706b89ab1eeb --
https://github.com/ecnelises updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82968
>From a06fa5e18313ad50019d50006e34a6b8249d95cd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Qiu Chaofan
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 16:32:28 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [PowerPC] Add intrinsics for rldimi/rlwimi/rlwnm
These built
Sirraide wrote:
It seems like the assertion has been in Clang since 2011, and back then, we
*were* checking for placeholders in `CreateBuiltinBinOp()`, so at that point it
made sense, but this check seems to have been removed since then.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83103
___
https://github.com/animeshk-amd updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82220
>From b891329e49972c15941f2d15408ff32cfe3995f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Animesh Kumar
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:28:39 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] [OpenMP][Clang] Enable inscan modifier for generic datatypes
Sirraide wrote:
Yeah, it seems the change that ultimately caused this to break was made in
2011, which moved the handling of placeholders for this code path up into
`SemaOverload.cpp`, and from what I can tell, the case of either operand of
`.*` potentially being an overload set when `.*` is n
Sirraide wrote:
In my opinion, we ought to get `.*` ought of the way early—as I’m currently
doing in this pr—as it makes little sense to do overloading-specific
placeholder handling on an operator that isn’t even overloadable—we should
instead just handle all placeholders immediately.
https:/
https://github.com/ChuanqiXu9 created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83108
This from https://reviews.llvm.org/D41416. And we plan to introduce on disk
hash table based on this. See https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76774.
Following off are cited from https://reviews.llvm.org
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Chuanqi Xu (ChuanqiXu9)
Changes
This from https://reviews.llvm.org/D41416. And we plan to introduce on disk
hash table based on this. See https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76774.
Following off are cited from https://reviews.llvm.o
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
Personally I feel this patch is good and the testing result from our workload
shows it is good too. But it looks like the performance testing results from
google @zygoloid @ilya-biryukov is not good. So maybe we need to wait for
landing this. (It will be great if @ilya-biryuk
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
Oh, I didn't notice you've removed D153003 already. But the branch name looks
not good. So I've created a pr in
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83108
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76774
___
cfe-commits mailing
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 1ecbab56dcbb78268c8d19af34a50591f90b12a0
59e1880df74434e3c446705788d92b5949d99536 --
vgvassilev wrote:
> Personally I feel this patch is good and the testing result from our workload
> shows it is good too. But it looks like the performance testing results from
> google @zygoloid @ilya-biryukov is not good. So maybe we need to wait for
> landing this. (It will be great if @ily
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
Weird. I only see two failures in my local environment:
```
Failed Tests (2):
Clang :: Modules/cxx-templates.cpp
Clang :: Modules/odr_hash.cpp
```
And I saw both of them in my patch. It is simply order mismatches.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83108
__
Sirraide wrote:
Lastly, it also seems weird to me that a function called
`CreateOverloadedBinOp()` is called to handle `.*`—an operator that can’t be
overloaded—but seeing as this function has apparently been handling this case
for over a decade now, I’m probably not going to question this any
https://github.com/AMS21 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83055
>From 821fbb9c197982d929cced2ad2ad4bbde8195889 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: AMS21
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 21:45:12 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [clang-tidy] Fix `cppcoreguidelines-missing-std-forward`
false positive for
@@ -134,6 +134,10 @@ Changes in existing checks
` check by
ignoring local variable with ``[maybe_unused]`` attribute.
+- Fixed :doc:`cppcoreguidelines-missing-std-forward
+ ` check giving false
+ positives for deleted functions.
+
AMS21 wrote:
Sure look
orcguru wrote:
> A question: For `PPCTLSDynamicCall.cpp`, would it be better if we instead
> reworded some of the sentences and not use `Load*@toc`?
>
> I thought about this for a bit and I think the full sentences may be a bit
> better, so I added some sample comment suggestions, but if you t
vgvassilev wrote:
> Weird. I only see two failures in my local environment:
>
> ```
> Failed Tests (2):
> Clang :: Modules/cxx-templates.cpp
> Clang :: Modules/odr_hash.cpp
> ```
>
> And I saw both of them in my patch. It is simply order mismatches.
Ha, ok. I know that my system constantly
https://github.com/ChuanqiXu9 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/83108
>From 59e1880df74434e3c446705788d92b5949d99536 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vassil Vassilev
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 15:16:11 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] D41416: [modules] [pch] Do not deserialize all lazy
temp
https://github.com/Pierre-vh approved this pull request.
LGTM, but wait for @t-tye or @jayfoad to approve as well
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/79236
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mai
401 - 483 of 483 matches
Mail list logo
