efriedma-quic wrote:
Hmm... so basically, the program is partitioned into parts with branch
enforcement disabled, and parts with branch enforcement enabled, and there's
some defined transition between the two? So in this case, the metadata is
nonsense, and you want to ignore it. I guess that
https://github.com/PeterChou1 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96358
>From bb407e7c6de15d7ed2f0dd645ca2a469ee1f8a8e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: PeterChou1
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 16:57:30 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Revert "Revert "[clang-doc] Add --asset option to
clang-doc"
https://github.com/tarunprabhu created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96678
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#95043
>From b07dae1f1b758e9f55667dac4db38c78bd609656 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tarun Prabhu
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:56:50 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "[flang] Add basic -mt
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir-llvm
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-driver
Author: Tarun Prabhu (tarunprabhu)
Changes
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#95043
---
Patch is 26.02 KiB, truncated to 20.00 KiB below, full version:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96678.diff
26 Files
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Tarun Prabhu (tarunprabhu)
Changes
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#95043
---
Patch is 26.02 KiB, truncated to 20.00 KiB below, full version:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96678.diff
26 Files Affected:
- (modified) clang/include/
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-flang-driver
Author: Tarun Prabhu (tarunprabhu)
Changes
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#95043
---
Patch is 26.02 KiB, truncated to 20.00 KiB below, full version:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96678.diff
26 Files Affected:
- (modified) clang/i
efriedma-quic wrote:
I didn't actually look at this PR closely before I commented.
I think the specific checks clang is doing here have to be part of clang: in
particular, clang needs to translate from gcc syntax to LLVM IR asm syntax, and
that requires parsing the constraints. So these check
steakhal wrote:
> Hi @steakhal , this change seems to have exposed by div/0 error in a very
> particular corner we came across after integrating this change. Could you try
> this case to see if can repro?
Yea, it seems to crash. I'll fix it once I have some time. Probably early next
week if I
https://github.com/banach-space approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96678
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Tarun Prabhu
Date: 2024-06-25T13:25:39-06:00
New Revision: 8dd9494056d6797144dfabbbfb6d478c95375019
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8dd9494056d6797144dfabbbfb6d478c95375019
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8dd9494056d6797144dfabbbfb6d478c95375019.diff
https://github.com/tarunprabhu closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96678
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: Karl-Johan Karlsson
Date: 2024-06-25T21:27:57+02:00
New Revision: 7e77353db6984b2bf07f54fd0ef5f56bf1aa8244
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7e77353db6984b2bf07f54fd0ef5f56bf1aa8244
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7e77353db6984b2bf07f54fd0ef5f56bf1aa8244
https://github.com/karka228 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96457
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
karka228 wrote:
> Whoops, sorry about that mistake in the test. The patch is LGTM. Thanks!
Thanks for the fast review :-)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96457
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/c
https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
Some wording changes; more may come as I better understand the concept.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96453
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/ma
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96453
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
https://github.com/hokein created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96686
This patch addresses an issue where non-template explicit deduction guides were
not considered when synthesized the deduction guides for alias templates.
Fixes #94927.
>From 92f9733b620f8d15283c520adceae161b11e
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Haojian Wu (hokein)
Changes
This patch addresses an issue where non-template explicit deduction guides were
not considered when synthesized the deduction guides for alias templates.
Fixes #94927.
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/l
https://github.com/AlexisPerry created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96688
This aims to reland the changes and fix the broken test from PR
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95043
>From 2312d31b14aecc6eeea2e81d221ee004e5de3efc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alexis Perry-Holb
https://github.com/5chmidti approved this pull request.
LGTM from my side
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96203
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/5chmidti edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96203
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -25,3 +25,16 @@ Example:
}
// already declared as extern
extern int v2;
+
+Options
+---
+
+.. option:: FixMode
+
+ Selects the fix mode when fixing automatically.
5chmidti wrote:
Not sure if it is better: `Selects what kind of a fix the check sho
https://github.com/zygoloid approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93115
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/zygoloid edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93115
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1336,75 +1336,56 @@ static llvm::Value *CreateCoercedLoad(Address Src,
llvm::Type *Ty,
return CGF.Builder.CreateLoad(Tmp);
}
-// Function to store a first-class aggregate into memory. We prefer to
-// store the elements rather than the aggregate to be more friendly to
@@ -4772,7 +4772,8 @@ class CodeGenFunction : public CodeGenTypeCache {
/// Build all the stores needed to initialize an aggregate at Dest with the
/// value Val.
zygoloid wrote:
This comment looks out of date.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/9
sdesmalen-arm wrote:
Hi @CarolineConcatto could you give a quick status update on this PR? Is there
any reason you've held off merging it?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/88499
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://
https://github.com/jyknight edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96540
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -150,8 +150,8 @@ TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_ia32_pmovmskb, "iV8c", "ncV:64:",
"mmx,sse")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_ia32_pmulhuw, "V4sV4sV4s", "ncV:64:", "mmx,sse")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_ia32_psadbw, "V4sV8cV8c", "ncV:64:", "mmx,sse")
TARGET_BUILTIN(__builtin_ia32_pshufw, "V
https://github.com/jyknight commented:
Thanks for the detailed review comments!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96540
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1035,10 +1077,11 @@ _mm_srli_pi32(__m64 __m, int __count)
/// \param __count
///A 64-bit integer vector interpreted as a single 64-bit integer.
/// \returns A 64-bit integer vector containing the right-shifted value.
-static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS
+static _
@@ -2108,9 +2106,8 @@ static __inline__ __m128i __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS
_mm_add_epi32(__m128i __a,
/// \param __b
///A 64-bit integer.
/// \returns A 64-bit integer containing the sum of both parameters.
-static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS_MMX _mm_add_si64(__m64 __a,
-
@@ -2502,10 +2509,25 @@ _mm_mulhi_pu16(__m64 __a, __m64 __b)
///A pointer to a 64-bit memory location that will receive the
conditionally
///copied integer values. The address of the memory location does not have
///to be aligned.
-static __inline__ void __DEFAULT_
@@ -124,10 +143,11 @@ _mm_cvtm64_si64(__m64 __m)
///written to the upper 32 bits of the result.
/// \returns A 64-bit integer vector of [8 x i8] containing the converted
///values.
-static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS
+static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS_S
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+USE_XMM=
jyknight wrote:
These are the tests I used to validate that the re-implementation works
properly: I found it extremely important to have validation that my
implementation works properly, because i certainly messed up a few times.
I d
@@ -21,10 +21,29 @@ typedef int __v2si __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
typedef short __v4hi __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
typedef char __v8qi __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
+/* Unsigned types */
+typedef unsigned long long __v1du __attribute__ ((__vector_size
@@ -21,10 +21,29 @@ typedef int __v2si __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
typedef short __v4hi __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
typedef char __v8qi __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
+/* Unsigned types */
+typedef unsigned long long __v1du __attribute__ ((__vector_size
@@ -1558,10 +1559,10 @@ _mm_cvttss_si64(__m128 __a)
/// \param __a
///A 128-bit vector of [4 x float].
/// \returns A 64-bit integer vector containing the converted values.
-static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS_MMX
+static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS_SSE2
_mm
@@ -17,13 +17,11 @@
#include
/* Define the default attributes for the functions in this file. */
-#define __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS
\
- __attribute__((__always_inline__, __nodebug__,
\
-
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+USE_XMM=
+#USE_XMM=--use-xmm
jyknight wrote:
It works if you first delete/ifdef-out test_stores and test_maskmove. I didn't
make those generic.
(The "USE_XMM" version is to validate that the unused bits of the input xmm
registers being set to
@@ -32,12 +32,13 @@ typedef unsigned int __v4su
__attribute__((__vector_size__(16)));
#endif
/* Define the default attributes for the functions in this file. */
-#define __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS
\
- __attribute__((__always_inlin
@@ -242,10 +243,11 @@ _mm_hadd_epi32(__m128i __a, __m128i __b)
///destination.
/// \returns A 64-bit vector of [4 x i16] containing the horizontal sums of
both
///operands.
-static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS_MMX
+static __inline__ __m64 __DEFAULT_FN_ATTRS
_mm
@@ -614,12 +623,15 @@ _mm_shuffle_epi8(__m128i __a, __m128i __b)
///1: Clear the corresponding byte in the destination. \n
///0: Copy the selected source byte to the corresponding byte in the
///destination. \n
-///Bits [3:0] select the source byte to be copied.
@@ -177,7 +175,10 @@ _mm_abs_epi32(__m128i __a)
/// \returns A 64-bit integer vector containing the concatenated right-shifted
///value.
#define _mm_alignr_pi8(a, b, n) \
- ((__m64)__builtin_ia32_palignr((__v8qi)(__m64)(a), (__v8qi)(__m64)(b), (n)))
+ ((__m64)__builtin_sh
@@ -1392,7 +1392,8 @@ class CXXRecordDecl : public RecordDecl {
bool allowConstDefaultInit() const {
return !data().HasUninitializedFields ||
!(data().HasDefaultedDefaultConstructor ||
- needsImplicitDefaultConstructor());
+ needsImplici
mstorsjo wrote:
> @mstorsjo It seems your compiler build does not have int128_t enabled.
Indeed, Clang doesn't provide int128_t for 32 bit targets, AFAIK.
> Could you please test #96240 in your environment to verify it has no such
> problem?
That PR does seem to work fine, in such an environm
rnk wrote:
IIUC, this effectively removes all empty records from LLVM struct types. This
makes the IR less "pretty", but these subobjects are notionally empty and
consist of only padding bytes (i8 and i8 arrays) at the end of the day. I think
that's acceptable. + @rjmccall , does that sound go
rjmccall wrote:
That sounds fine to me as long as we're still emitting projections of them
properly (i.e. not just assuming "oh, it's an empty record, we can use whatever
pointer we want because it'll never be dereferenced").
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96422
jcranmer-intel wrote:
> I looked at my meeting notes for discussion of this paper and I think we do
> need to worry about what the C standard says. From my notes: `The big intent
> from this change seems to be about making INFINITY to be a feature test
> macro.`, so if users are going to porta
https://github.com/CedricSwa updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94865
>From 012849c5410960001ca5bbcb90ea2cf4a661b840 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Cedric Schwarzer
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2024 17:52:02 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Improve error message for invalid lambda captures
---
c
efriedma-quic wrote:
For CGExprConstant, the code is checking "empty" in the sense of whether
there's a corresponding LLVM field. So almost certainly needs changes. Not
sure how that isn't causing test failures; maybe there's missing test coverage.
For CGClass, it's not directly tied to the
@@ -207,6 +211,23 @@
#error "Mandatory macros {FLT,DBL,LDBL}_MAX_10_EXP are invalid."
#endif
+#if __STDC_VERSION__ >= 202311L || !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__)
+#ifndef FLT_NORM_MAX
+ #error "Mandatory macro FLT_NORM_MAX is missing."
+#else
+ _Static_assert(FLT_NORM_MAX >= 1.
https://github.com/dwblaikie created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96699
With the recent fix for this situation in class members (#93873) (for
which the fixed code is invalid prior to this patch - making migrating
code difficult as it must be in lock-step with the compiler migration,
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: David Blaikie (dwblaikie)
Changes
With the recent fix for this situation in class members (#93873) (for
which the fixed code is invalid prior to this patch - making migrating
code difficult as it must be in lock-step with the compiler migra
dwblaikie wrote:
Sent a patch to add a warning flag for the warning this patch uses:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96699
With that, we could disable the warning during the compiler migration,
decoupling compiler migration from code cleanup.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pul
@@ -1336,75 +1336,56 @@ static llvm::Value *CreateCoercedLoad(Address Src,
llvm::Type *Ty,
return CGF.Builder.CreateLoad(Tmp);
}
-// Function to store a first-class aggregate into memory. We prefer to
-// store the elements rather than the aggregate to be more friendly to
@@ -1336,75 +1336,56 @@ static llvm::Value *CreateCoercedLoad(Address Src,
llvm::Type *Ty,
return CGF.Builder.CreateLoad(Tmp);
}
-// Function to store a first-class aggregate into memory. We prefer to
-// store the elements rather than the aggregate to be more friendly to
@@ -113,7 +113,11 @@ static T PickFP(const llvm::fltSemantics *Sem, T
IEEEHalfVal, T IEEESingleVal,
static void DefineFloatMacros(MacroBuilder &Builder, StringRef Prefix,
const llvm::fltSemantics *Sem, StringRef Ext) {
- const char *DenormMin, *
https://github.com/jdenny-ornl created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96704
The goal of this patch is to enable utilizing LLVM plugin passes and remarks
for GPU offload code at link time. Specifically, this patch extends
clang-linker-wrapper's `--offload-opt` (and consequently `-ml
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-driver
Author: Joel E. Denny (jdenny-ornl)
Changes
The goal of this patch is to enable utilizing LLVM plugin passes and remarks
for GPU offload code at link time. Specifically, this patch extends
clang-linker-wrapper's
@@ -21,10 +21,29 @@ typedef int __v2si __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
typedef short __v4hi __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
typedef char __v8qi __attribute__((__vector_size__(8)));
jyknight wrote:
IIUC, these files intentionally don't have any depen
https://github.com/jyknight edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96540
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+; Check various clang-linker-wrapper pass options after -offload-opt.
+
+; REQUIRES: llvm-plugins, llvm-examples
+; REQUIRES: x86-registered-target
+; REQUIRES: amdgpu-registered-target
+
+; Setup.
+; RUN: split-file %s %t
+; RUN: opt -o %t/host-x86_64-unknown-li
https://github.com/jhuber6 commented:
Makes sense overall. However in the future I'm looking to move away from the
home-baked LTO pipeline in favor of giving it to the linker. That allows me to
set up libraries as a part of the target toolchain in the driver. I guess for
that I'll just need to
https://github.com/jhuber6 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96704
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+// Check that these simple command lines for listing LLVM options are
supported,
jhuber6 wrote:
Do we have any other tests that just check the output for `--help`? Might be a
little excessive.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96704
_
fhahn wrote:
Rebased, updated and added option to disable this (`-fno-pointer-tbaa`). I
think this would be ready for a review now :)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/76612
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://list
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+// Check that these simple command lines for listing LLVM options are
supported,
jdenny-ornl wrote:
Grepping for -help in llvm's test suite finds various such tests. The point
here is to make sure `--offload-opt=--help can list these opt-like
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+; Check various clang-linker-wrapper pass options after -offload-opt.
+
+; REQUIRES: llvm-plugins, llvm-examples
+; REQUIRES: x86-registered-target
+; REQUIRES: amdgpu-registered-target
+
+; Setup.
+; RUN: split-file %s %t
+; RUN: opt -o %t/host-x86_64-unknown-li
https://github.com/rymdtian updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95957
>From f001ebc8b2670240930de82bb5b4692a0376248e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Raymond Tian
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:58:32 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] [HIP][Clang][Sema] Fix crash when calling builtins with
pointer
https://github.com/alexfh commented:
Should we add a test for this flag? Something around existing tests in
clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.expl.spec/p2-20.cpp and
clang/test/CXX/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.stc/p1.cpp.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96699
___
@@ -86,6 +86,8 @@ DYNAMIC_TAG(RELRSZ, 35) // Size of Relr relocation table.
DYNAMIC_TAG(RELR, 36)// Address of relocation table (Relr entries).
DYNAMIC_TAG(RELRENT, 37) // Size of a Relr relocation entry.
+DYNAMIC_TAG(CREL, 38) // CREL relocation table
+
--
https://github.com/jdenny-ornl updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96704
>From 98e04dd372b82c2c5309a6148bb49eb1012a97ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Joel E. Denny"
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:29:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [LinkerWrapper] Extend with usual pass options
The goa
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+; Check various clang-linker-wrapper pass options after -offload-opt.
+
+; REQUIRES: llvm-plugins, llvm-examples
+; REQUIRES: x86-registered-target
+; REQUIRES: amdgpu-registered-target
+
+; Setup.
+; RUN: split-file %s %t
+; RUN: opt -o %t/host-x86_64-unknown-li
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+; Check various clang-linker-wrapper pass options after -offload-opt.
+
+; REQUIRES: llvm-plugins, llvm-examples
+; REQUIRES: x86-registered-target
+; REQUIRES: amdgpu-registered-target
+
+; Setup.
+; RUN: split-file %s %t
+; RUN: opt -o %t/host-x86_64-unknown-li
jyknight wrote:
> I guess the clang calling convention code never uses MMX types for
> passing/returning values?
Correct, Clang never uses MMX types in its calling convention. This is actually
_wrong_ for the 32-bit x86 psABI. You're supposed to pass the first 3 MMX args
in mm0-2, and return
jdenny-ornl wrote:
> Makes sense overall. However in the future I'm looking to move away from the
> home-baked LTO pipeline in favor of giving it to the linker. That allows me
> to set up libraries as a part of the target toolchain in the driver. I guess
> for that I'll just need to forward `-
https://github.com/jdenny-ornl updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96704
>From 98e04dd372b82c2c5309a6148bb49eb1012a97ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Joel E. Denny"
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:29:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [LinkerWrapper] Extend with usual pass options
The goa
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+; Check various clang-linker-wrapper pass options after -offload-opt.
+
+; REQUIRES: llvm-plugins, llvm-examples
+; REQUIRES: x86-registered-target
+; REQUIRES: amdgpu-registered-target
+
+; Setup.
+; RUN: split-file %s %t
+; RUN: opt -o %t/host-x86_64-unknown-li
https://github.com/trcrsired updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96417
>From 70823f780dc0748446c752f27b52b0f6061bc7e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: trcrsired
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 00:07:19 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Support --sysroot= for ${arch}-windows-msvc targets
I think it is
@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+; Check various clang-linker-wrapper pass options after -offload-opt.
jhuber6 wrote:
Hm, is this really the only LLVM-IR file in the Driver directory? I guess it
makes sense, though you could probably just do what the other linker wrapper
test
@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+; Check various clang-linker-wrapper pass options after -offload-opt.
jdenny-ornl wrote:
Yeah, I suppose that's just as good. I do wonder if this is really the right
directory for these tests at all. Its lit.local.cfg has a %clang_cc1
substi
@@ -1336,75 +1336,56 @@ static llvm::Value *CreateCoercedLoad(Address Src,
llvm::Type *Ty,
return CGF.Builder.CreateLoad(Tmp);
}
-// Function to store a first-class aggregate into memory. We prefer to
-// store the elements rather than the aggregate to be more friendly to
Author: Congcong Cai
Date: 2024-06-26T08:05:00+08:00
New Revision: 6b29965fd9355243f23a83a590a70ac7744f0e0f
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/6b29965fd9355243f23a83a590a70ac7744f0e0f
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/6b29965fd9355243f23a83a590a70ac7744f0e0f.diff
https://github.com/HerrCai0907 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96199
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/dwblaikie updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96699
>From a539afc7b81502ffcab7028bfe8266b8e32951d9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Blaikie
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 21:02:50 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Clang: Add warning flag for storage class specifiers on
ex
@@ -652,6 +652,134 @@ in the future. The expected roadmap for Reduced BMIs as
of Clang 19.x is:
comes, the term BMI will refer to the Reduced BMI and the Full BMI will only
be meaningful to build systems which elect to support two-phase compilation.
+Experimental No Tra
dwblaikie wrote:
> Should we add a test for this flag? Something around existing tests in
> clang/test/CXX/temp/temp.spec/temp.expl.spec/p2-20.cpp and
> clang/test/CXX/dcl.dcl/dcl.spec/dcl.stc/p1.cpp.
Oh, right, I did have a new test I meant to add, but that's a better place for
it - so I've
https://github.com/ahmedbougacha edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94056
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/jdenny-ornl updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96704
>From 98e04dd372b82c2c5309a6148bb49eb1012a97ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Joel E. Denny"
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:29:49 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [LinkerWrapper] Extend with usual pass options
The goa
201 - 300 of 385 matches
Mail list logo
