zmodem wrote:
The build is still broken (e.g.
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/63/builds/3861). I'll back it out.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115099
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/c
Author: Hans Wennborg
Date: 2025-02-04T11:19:20+01:00
New Revision: 83ff9d4a34b1e579dd809759d13b70b8837f0cde
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/83ff9d4a34b1e579dd809759d13b70b8837f0cde
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/83ff9d4a34b1e579dd809759d13b70b8837f0cde.diff
https://github.com/zmodem approved this pull request.
lg
> Previously: #120787
That one landed before the 20 branch point, and this will land after. Maybe we
should ask to have it back-ported.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126512
___
cfe
@@ -6097,10 +6097,29 @@ const char *Driver::GetNamedOutputPath(Compilation &C,
const JobAction &JA,
}
llvm::PrettyStackTraceString CrashInfo("Computing output path");
+
// Output to a user requested destination?
if (AtTopLevel && !isa(JA) && !isa(JA)) {
-if (Arg
@@ -14,3 +14,11 @@
//--- test.pcm
// CPP20WARNING-NOT: clang-cl: warning: argument unused during compilation:
'/std:c++20' [-Wunused-command-line-argument]
+
+// test whether the following outputs %Hello.bmi
+// RUN: %clang_cl /std:c++20 --precompile -x c++-module
-fmodule-o
@@ -6097,10 +6097,29 @@ const char *Driver::GetNamedOutputPath(Compilation &C,
const JobAction &JA,
}
llvm::PrettyStackTraceString CrashInfo("Computing output path");
+
// Output to a user requested destination?
if (AtTopLevel && !isa(JA) && !isa(JA)) {
-if (Arg
https://github.com/zmodem closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124022
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
@ziqingluo-90 can you take a look?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/124022
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/zmodem approved this pull request.
lgtm
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126139
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -154,4 +154,89 @@ namespace GlobalTest {
};
inline float Test::disallowedStaticMember2 = 2.3; // hidden-warning
{{'disallowedStaticMember2' may be duplicated when built into a shared library:
it is mutable, has hidden visibility, and external linkage}}
-} // namespace
https://github.com/zmodem edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125902
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -3669,6 +3669,7 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
/// cause problems if the variable is mutable, its initialization is
/// effectful, or its address is taken.
bool GloballyUniqueObjectMightBeAccidentallyDuplicated(const VarDecl *Dcl);
+ void DiagnoseDangerousUni
https://github.com/zmodem commented:
Seems reasonable to me. Just a few very minor nits.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125902
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commit
@@ -3669,6 +3669,7 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
/// cause problems if the variable is mutable, its initialization is
/// effectful, or its address is taken.
bool GloballyUniqueObjectMightBeAccidentallyDuplicated(const VarDecl *Dcl);
+ void DiagnoseDangerousUni
@@ -13374,6 +13374,62 @@ void Sema::checkNonTrivialCUnion(QualType QT,
SourceLocation Loc,
.visit(QT, nullptr, false);
}
+bool Sema::GloballyUniqueObjectMightBeAccidentallyDuplicated(
+const VarDecl *Dcl) {
+ if (!Dcl || !getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
@@ -6153,6 +6153,15 @@ def warn_static_local_in_extern_inline : Warning<
def note_convert_inline_to_static : Note<
"use 'static' to give inline function %0 internal linkage">;
+def warn_possible_object_duplication_mutable : Warning<
+ "%0 is mutable, has hidden visibility,
zmodem wrote:
Sounds good. This basically seems fine to me overall. I've just added two more
comments.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117622
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
zmodem wrote:
Looks like I was wrong. clang-cl does support `--config` since
daebf2c13ce27ac6a7403525cc7fcbc063eb892e, so I suppose we can't just ignore
these files.
Your change to update the triple based on clang-cl mode earlier makes sense to
me.
I'm less sure about manually inspecting the
zmodem wrote:
Nice, thank you!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/120222
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1286,6 +1299,16 @@ Compilation *Driver::BuildCompilation(ArrayRef ArgList) {
appendOneArg(Args, Opt, nullptr);
}
}
+
+// The config file may have changed the architecture so apply it.
+if (HasConfigFile && Args.hasArg(options::OPT__SLASH_arm64E
@@ -1247,6 +1247,19 @@ Compilation *Driver::BuildCompilation(ArrayRef ArgList) {
CLOptions = std::make_unique(
ParseArgStrings(ArgList.slice(1), /*UseDriverMode=*/true,
ContainsError));
+ // We want to determine the triple early so that we load the correct config.
+
zmodem wrote:
> You don't need to use config files with `clang-cl` to need this patch -- you
> need it if you use triple-based config files and also use `clang-cl`. The
> issue is that if you have, for example, a `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.cfg` in a
> location that `clang` loads by default, the
https://github.com/zmodem approved this pull request.
The current version lgtm by the way
Maybe we should also put a blurb in the main llvm release notes and link to
this one.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122462
___
cfe-commits mailing l
https://github.com/zmodem approved this pull request.
Please go ahead and merge.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122130
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
Here's what I got from creduce:
```
$ cat /tmp/a.ii
template
using compare_three_way_result_t = _Up ::type;
struct __sfinae_assign_base {};
template
concept __is_derived_from_optional =
requires(_Tp __t) { [](_Up) {}(__t); };
template
requires(__is_derived_from_optional
zmodem wrote:
> We've started seeing libc++ test failures in the Fuchsia toolchain buildbots
> for Windows
We're hitting the same error in Chromium builds. Here is a stand-alone
reproducer: https://crbug.com/388428503#comment4
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102857
@@ -8146,14 +8146,45 @@ and copied back to the argument after the callee
returns.
}];
}
+def AnnotateDeclDocs : Documentation {
+ let Category = DocCatType;
+ let Heading = "annotate_decl";
+ let Content = [{
+This attribute is used to add annotations to declarations, ty
@@ -0,0 +1,219 @@
+=
+C++ Type Aware Allocators
+=
+
+.. contents::
+ :local:
+
+Introduction
+
+
+Clang includes an experimental implementation of P2719 "Type-aware allocation
+and deallocation functions".
+
+This is a
zmodem wrote:
Okay. I think most of my previous comments (except for "maybe the fix is to
always ignore config files in clang-cl mode) still apply though.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111397
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.
zmodem wrote:
> I intend to make the warning on-by-default. However, it currently triggers at
> several places in the LLVM project, breaking the CI. Fixing them is
> nontrivial and cluttered up the PR, so I made it DefaultIgnore in order to
> keep things focused. Should the PR be accepted I pl
@@ -6153,6 +6153,15 @@ def warn_static_local_in_extern_inline : Warning<
def note_convert_inline_to_static : Note<
"use 'static' to give inline function %0 internal linkage">;
+def warn_possible_object_duplication_mutable : Warning<
+ "%0 is mutable, has hidden visibility,
@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
+/**
+ * When building shared libraries, hidden objects which are defined in header
+ * files will be duplicated, with one copy in each shared library. If the
object
+ * was meant to be globally unique (one copy per program), this can cause very
+ * subtle bugs.
@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
+/**
+ * When building shared libraries, hidden objects which are defined in header
+ * files will be duplicated, with one copy in each shared library. If the
object
+ * was meant to be globally unique (one copy per program), this can cause very
+ * subtle bugs.
@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
+/**
+ * When building shared libraries, hidden objects which are defined in header
+ * files will be duplicated, with one copy in each shared library. If the
object
+ * was meant to be globally unique (one copy per program), this can cause very
+ * subtle bugs.
@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
+/**
+ * When building shared libraries, hidden objects which are defined in header
+ * files will be duplicated, with one copy in each shared library. If the
object
+ * was meant to be globally unique (one copy per program), this can cause very
+ * subtle bugs.
@@ -6153,6 +6153,15 @@ def warn_static_local_in_extern_inline : Warning<
def note_convert_inline_to_static : Note<
"use 'static' to give inline function %0 internal linkage">;
+def warn_possible_object_duplication_mutable : Warning<
+ "%0 is mutable, has hidden visibility,
@@ -508,6 +508,10 @@ New Compiler Flags
- clang-cl and clang-dxc now support
``-fdiagnostics-color=[auto|never|always]``
in addition to ``-f[no-]color-diagnostics``.
+- The ``-Wunique-object-duplication`` warning has been added to warn about
objects
zmodem
@@ -13374,6 +13374,62 @@ void Sema::checkNonTrivialCUnion(QualType QT,
SourceLocation Loc,
.visit(QT, nullptr, false);
}
+bool Sema::GloballyUniqueObjectMightBeAccidentallyDuplicated(
+const VarDecl *Dcl) {
+ if (!Dcl || !getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
@@ -3661,6 +3661,12 @@ class Sema final : public SemaBase {
NonTrivialCUnionContext UseContext,
unsigned NonTrivialKind);
+ /// Certain globally-unique variables might be accidentally duplicated if
+ /// built into mu
zmodem wrote:
Confirmed Chromium on Windows builds with this patch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122423
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ code bases.
containing strict-aliasing violations. The new default behavior can be
disabled using ``-fno-pointer-tbaa``.
+- Clang will now more aggressively use undefined behavior on pointer addition
+ overflow for optimization purposes. For example, a
https://github.com/zmodem edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117622
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -13386,6 +13386,62 @@ void Sema::checkNonTrivialCUnion(QualType QT,
SourceLocation Loc,
.visit(QT, nullptr, false);
}
+bool Sema::GloballyUniqueObjectMightBeAccidentallyDuplicated(
+const VarDecl *dcl) {
+ if (!dcl || !getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
+return fals
https://github.com/zmodem commented:
Some scattered thoughts:
- What about code that's not going into a shared library. Should we disable the
warning then, or is the idea that the user does not enable the warning flag in
that case?
- The new warning is DefaultIgnore. Do you figure it's too no
@@ -13386,6 +13386,62 @@ void Sema::checkNonTrivialCUnion(QualType QT,
SourceLocation Loc,
.visit(QT, nullptr, false);
}
+bool Sema::GloballyUniqueObjectMightBeAccidentallyDuplicated(
+const VarDecl *dcl) {
+ if (!dcl || !getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
@@ -13386,6 +13386,62 @@ void Sema::checkNonTrivialCUnion(QualType QT,
SourceLocation Loc,
.visit(QT, nullptr, false);
}
+bool Sema::GloballyUniqueObjectMightBeAccidentallyDuplicated(
+const VarDecl *dcl) {
+ if (!dcl || !getLangOpts().CPlusPlus)
+return fals
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ code bases.
containing strict-aliasing violations. The new default behavior can be
disabled using ``-fno-pointer-tbaa``.
+- Clang will now more aggressively use undefined behavior on pointer addition
+ overflow for optimization purposes. For example, a
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ code bases.
containing strict-aliasing violations. The new default behavior can be
disabled using ``-fno-pointer-tbaa``.
+- Clang will now more aggressively use undefined behavior on pointer addition
+ overflow for optimization purposes. For example, a
https://github.com/zmodem commented:
Thanks for following up on this!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122462
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ code bases.
containing strict-aliasing violations. The new default behavior can be
disabled using ``-fno-pointer-tbaa``.
+- Clang will now more aggressively use undefined behavior on pointer addition
zmodem wrote:
Could we add a motivat
https://github.com/zmodem edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122462
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ code bases.
containing strict-aliasing violations. The new default behavior can be
disabled using ``-fno-pointer-tbaa``.
+- Clang will now more aggressively use undefined behavior on pointer addition
+ overflow for optimization purposes. For example, a
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ code bases.
containing strict-aliasing violations. The new default behavior can be
disabled using ``-fno-pointer-tbaa``.
+- Clang will now more aggressively use undefined behavior on pointer addition
+ overflow for optimization purposes. For example, a
@@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ code bases.
containing strict-aliasing violations. The new default behavior can be
disabled using ``-fno-pointer-tbaa``.
+- Clang will now more aggressively use undefined behavior on pointer addition
zmodem wrote:
Fair enough.
https://
zmodem wrote:
I'll try to take a look. Also, @ilya-biryukov do you have someone who might
want to take a look?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117622
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mail
https://github.com/zmodem approved this pull request.
lgtm
I'll wait a day or so before merging in case other reviewers want to chime in.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125902
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://
zmodem wrote:
> What do you think about implementing the suggestion about checking if virtual
> methods actually get overridden or not?
Since we could only do it for classes with internal linkage, I think it's
probably not very valuable.
Warning about virtual functions that are not overriding
https://github.com/zmodem closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131188
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -2706,6 +2706,9 @@ def warn_final_dtor_non_final_class : Warning<
InGroup;
def note_final_dtor_non_final_class_silence : Note<
"mark %0 as '%select{final|sealed}1' to silence this warning">;
+def warn_unnecessary_virtual_specifier : Warning<
+ "virtual method %0 is insi
https://github.com/zmodem edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131188
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -Wunnecessary-virtual-specifier %s
+
+struct Foo final {
+ Foo() = default;
+ virtual ~Foo() = default; // expected-warning {{virtual
method}}
+ virtual Foo& operator=(Foo& other) = default; // ex
https://github.com/zmodem commented:
Code and test lgtm, but I think we should consider enabling it by default.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/131188
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mail
https://github.com/zmodem created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133092
None
>From 7a874d12661de2fe93ac5eba8e68edf25053f462 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hans Wennborg
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 15:24:44 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [clang-cl] Accept the --warning-suppression-mappings= optio
zmodem wrote:
A few notes from looking today.
Reduced main a bit further:
```
int main(int argc, const char** argv) {
volatile auto p = &FilteredBreakIteratorBuilder::createEmptyInstance;
icu::UnicodeString* St = new icu::UnicodeString("abacabadabacab", 15);
delete St;
printf("OKAY\n");
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -verify -Wunnecessary-virtual-specifier %s
+
+struct Foo final {
+ Foo() = default;
+ virtual ~Foo() = default; // expected-warning {{virtual
method}}
+ virtual Foo& operator=(Foo& other) = default; // ex
zmodem wrote:
> but, that is still not a great reproducer for a reverted patch. Especially if
> the link issue is due to a missing support in linker. I would appreciate if
> you could maybe point to how exactly UnicodeString is used in failing
> scenario.
I'm sorry that we didn't catch this p
zmodem wrote:
We're seeing crashes that bisect to this change. Here is a reproducer:
https://crbug.com/410001969#comment3
I'll see if I can get something more reduced as well.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134357
___
cfe-commits mailing l
zmodem wrote:
Smaller repro:
```
$ cat /tmp/a.ii
class Trans_NS_cppgc_GarbageCollected {
void operator delete[](void *);
};
struct ScriptWrappable : Trans_NS_cppgc_GarbageCollected {
virtual ~ScriptWrappable();
};
struct __declspec(dllexport) ContentIndexEvent : ScriptWrappable {
Content
zmodem wrote:
> I think moving it to -Wextra may be a more palatable approach. What do others
> think?
Sounds good to me, and I think James makes a good argument.
Does that actually help LLVM and libc++ though? I think at least LLVM does
enable -Wextra.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/p
Author: Hans Wennborg
Date: 2025-04-22T11:11:33+02:00
New Revision: e12681ae733e8341c161534d4d4de2611573b616
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/e12681ae733e8341c161534d4d4de2611573b616
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/e12681ae733e8341c161534d4d4de2611573b616.diff
zmodem wrote:
I too had trouble understanding this change based on the description. Could you
give a concrete example of how mingw and msvc disagree on where to put the
attribute, and explain how this pr changes things?
Taking a step back, how will this simplify libc++'s visibility annotations
zmodem wrote:
> This causes the whole libc++ CI to fail, since we're not building against a
> compiler built from current trunk.
Can you provide an example, such as a link to a failing build, or an
explanation of the failure? I found
https://buildkite.com/llvm-project/libcxx-ci/builds?created
https://github.com/zmodem closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135611
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
> Thanks! Unfortunately it looks like the fix introduced a regression of
> #134265 on Windows. Repro:
(For reference, this is https://crbug.com/41261 on our side.)
The "deleted operator delete[]" is coming from here:
https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:v
https://github.com/zmodem updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138562
>From e221ba3b0f7b08bcfc56bf75f7505265c332637d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hans Wennborg
Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 20:24:15 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Sema] Warn about omitting deprecated enumerator in
switch
T
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ enum SwitchTwo {
};
void testSwitchTwo(enum SwitchTwo st) {
- switch (st) {} // expected-warning{{enumeration values 'Vim' and 'Emacs' not
handled in switch}}
+ switch (st) {} // expected-warning{{enumeration values 'Ed', 'Vim' and
'Emacs' not handled in
zmodem wrote:
I wonder if we should also do something special about the
`-Wdeprecated-declarations` diagnostic in switches.
If the user fixes the -Wswitch / -Wreturn-type warnings from `testSwitchFour`
the natural way:
```
int testSwitchFour(enum SwitchFour e) {
switch (e) {
case Red:
zmodem wrote:
> Fly-by comment: I drafted the following alternative comment in another
> thread. Please feel free to disregard as I don't know the tone and style of
> comments in these files. (But I appreciate your consideration for the
> contents in the message I'd like to see!)
>
> ```
>
https://github.com/zmodem closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138343
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/zmodem closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138507
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
> this causes a `-Wmicrosoft-goto` warning on [...]
Sent https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138507 for this.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138009
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.ll
https://github.com/zmodem created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138507
Follow-up to #138009 which added diagnostics for "jump past initialization" in
C mode, in which case they're not an MS extension.
Rate limit ยท GitHub
body {
backgr
https://github.com/zmodem created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138562
This undoes part of 3e4e3b17c14c15c23c0ed18ca9165b42b1b13ae3 which added the
"Omitting a deprecated constant is ok; it should never materialize." logic.
That seems wrong: deprecated means the enumerator is likel
@@ -95,6 +95,8 @@ struct CopiedTypeVisitor {
return asDerived().visitARCWeak(FT, std::forward(Args)...);
case QualType::PCK_Struct:
return asDerived().visitStruct(FT, std::forward(Args)...);
+case QualType::PCK_PtrAuth:
zmodem wrote:
style
@@ -103,3 +103,46 @@ static_assert(_Generic(typeof(overload_func(&ptr0)), int :
1, default : 0));
static_assert(_Generic(typeof(overload_func(&valid0)), float : 1, default :
0));
void func(int array[__ptrauth(VALID_DATA_KEY) 10]); // expected-error
{{'__ptrauth' qualifier o
https://github.com/zmodem commented:
Looks reasonable to my non-expert eyes
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136783
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/zmodem edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136783
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
Thanks! I'll go ahead and push the button. Hope you feel better soon!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135611
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
> Adding metadata to an instruction should never be required for correctness
I figured the existing use and the fact that it only needs to survive until
CoroSplit made it good enough. But you're right, we should do better.
I do think we need an explicit way to tell CoroSplit whet
https://github.com/zmodem created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127653
Parameters to a coroutine get copied (moved) to coroutine-local instances which
code inside the coroutine then uses.
The original parameters should not be part of the frame. Normally CoroSplit
figures that out
https://github.com/zmodem updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127653
>From cde82a27139c39406a9afb5b471fa527e52e5bca Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hans Wennborg
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 15:27:37 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Coroutines] Mark parameter allocas with
coro.outside.frame
zmodem wrote:
I think this is a better fix than #127524. Please take a look.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127653
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
We're hitting test failures on Windows as well after the re-land
(7e3735d1a1b85cea48feb45cb7c2b5d8eaa216ae). It seems to only reproduce on
Windows with ThinLTO, and causes some libclang and clangd lit tests to crash.
(Our bug: https://crbug.com/397252105).
https://github.com/llv
https://github.com/zmodem updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127653
>From cde82a27139c39406a9afb5b471fa527e52e5bca Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hans Wennborg
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 15:27:37 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/8] [Coroutines] Mark parameter allocas with
coro.outside.frame
https://github.com/zmodem closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127653
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -855,6 +855,16 @@ void CodeGenFunction::EmitCoroutineBody(const
CoroutineBodyStmt &S) {
// Create parameter copies. We do it before creating a promise, since an
// evolution of coroutine TS may allow promise constructor to observe
// parameter copies.
+for (
https://github.com/zmodem closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129120
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/zmodem approved this pull request.
lgtm
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129120
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
zmodem wrote:
We're seeing new -Wunguarded-availability warnings after this. A reduced
example:
```
$ cat /tmp/x.cc
template struct remove_cv { typedef T type; };
struct __attribute__((__availability__(android, introduced = 29)))
AAudioStreamWrapper { };
template struct Foo {
T *p;
};
te
Author: Hans Wennborg
Date: 2025-03-10T14:02:04+01:00
New Revision: 28fa1fcf55b973e13018ac115fcbb357b4c0baad
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/28fa1fcf55b973e13018ac115fcbb357b4c0baad
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/28fa1fcf55b973e13018ac115fcbb357b4c0baad.diff
1501 - 1600 of 1672 matches
Mail list logo
