nikic wrote:
ping @arsenm
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125287
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125338
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125995
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125858
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125858
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125858
Backport of 9725595f3acc0c1aaa354e15ac4ee2b1f8ff4cc9.
>From cc618a314c9432636446c6629e08a2293a9cf24c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yingwei Zheng
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2025 20:41:15 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] [InstCombine
nikic wrote:
Sorry, I didn't see this. I just submitted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125837 for the issues I ran into.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125834
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.or
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125837
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125837
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125837
Backport a few fixes for flang/MLIR library dependencies related to
MLIR_LINK_MLIR_DYLIB changes.
>From 86f0bbcd6ed9d20c7d40a5033b2862bf1497d617 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nikita Popov
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025
nikic wrote:
@JDevlieghere See
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/125554#issuecomment-2636081942 for
how to add a comment. You have to run it in the place where you did the
original cherry-pick and pass both commits at once.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/12
__
nikic wrote:
> Reason for using operand bundle -- The original discussion for this change is
> captured here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D105909 - My takeaway from the
> discussion is that the type id metadata was dropped by optimizations leading
> to not so clean implementation using metadata.
nikic wrote:
Reverted in
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/b84f7d17f84030092880857544e13d26a2507c62,
as this has been failing all pre-merge tests for the last two or three days
already.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125334
___
https://github.com/nikic requested changes to this pull request.
I believe this commit introduced BOLT test failures.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125334
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87573
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic requested changes to this pull request.
Missing LangRef specification.
More generally, a lot of context seems to be missing here. I see you link two
RFCs from 2021, neither of which appear to have received a response, and
neither of which actually describe the proposed
nikic wrote:
This backport is to fix TableGen OOM seen on i686-mingw.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125287
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-c
nikic wrote:
> > because the changes to shouldForceRelocation are ABI-breaking.
>
> Huh, interesting - out of curiosity, why do they break the ABI if those jumps
> are local to functions?
Ah sorry, I meant that they break the ABI of libLLVM.so by adding an additional
parameter to an exported
nikic wrote:
It's not possible to backport this in this form, because the changes to
shouldForceRelocation are ABI-breaking.
> so that the fixes can be pulled to rustc.
The LLVM 20 upgrade in Rust is already in progress, so this is not necessary.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/1250
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125040
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic commented:
At least based on your description, I don't think this intrinsic property
should be implemented using an attribute.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/122313
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-c
nikic wrote:
Why is this submitted against the release/19.x branch? Is this a backport? If
so, please indicate which commit it backports.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121046
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.l
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121100
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119169
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100773
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100789
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/100794
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -1986,10 +1986,12 @@ void
VPReverseVectorPointerRecipe::execute(VPTransformState &State) {
// LastLane = 1 - RunTimeVF
Value *LastLane = Builder.CreateSub(ConstantInt::get(IndexTy, 1), RunTimeVF);
Value *Ptr = State.get(getOperand(0), VPLane(0));
- Value *ResultPtr =
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118870
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
@dschuff For backport PRs, please rebase instead of merge. They do not use
squash merge.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119723
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-b
nikic wrote:
As this is for a fuzzer-generated test case
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/117133#issuecomment-2509952839),
it's not a regression (the issue exists since at least LLVM 13) and the fix is
non-trivial, I'm inclined to not backport.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117869
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/113146
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116865
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117082
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -192,6 +192,12 @@ class MemorySSAUpdater {
const BasicBlock *BB,
MemorySSA::InsertionPlace Point);
+ MemoryAccess *createMemoryAccessInBB2(Instruction *I,
+
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117136
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -190,7 +190,8 @@ class MemorySSAUpdater {
/// inaccessible and it *must* have removeMemoryAccess called on it.
MemoryAccess *createMemoryAccessInBB(Instruction *I, MemoryAccess
*Definition,
const BasicBlock *BB,
-
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116865
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116814
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116653
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
> @tru should this have been merged? Do I need to do something to facilitate?
> Sorry for not following up earlier I have been sick recently. Thanks.
Backport PRs need to be part of the release milestone, otherwise they're likely
to get forgotten about :) I added it just now.
htt
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111725
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111314
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116097
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
It would be good if @serge-sans-paille can review this backport, as it's
substantially different from the patch on main, and he's the most familiar with
this code.
The other PR linked above is, as I understand it, not a replacement for this
one -- it makes additional fixes in the
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116104
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic commented:
The cherry-picks here fail to preserve authorship information.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116097
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116097
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -15440,9 +15440,25 @@ bool BoUpSLP::collectValuesToDemote(
MaskedValueIsZero(I->getOperand(1), Mask, SimplifyQuery(*DL)));
});
};
+auto AbsChecker = [&](unsigned BitWidth, unsigned OrigBitWidth) {
+ assert(BitWidth <= OrigBitWidth && "Unexp
nikic wrote:
I'd still prefer not to backport this. We're changing many targets to use
softPromoteHalfType in LLVM 20 (hopefully all if someone gets around to it...),
with the ABI changes that implies. I don't think it makes sense to backport
this just for loongarch, and I also don't want to b
nikic wrote:
Yeah, I don't think we should backport this.
A backportable variant of this fix would be to disable the phi handling
entirely.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114786
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@list
@@ -15440,9 +15440,25 @@ bool BoUpSLP::collectValuesToDemote(
MaskedValueIsZero(I->getOperand(1), Mask, SimplifyQuery(*DL)));
});
};
+auto AbsChecker = [&](unsigned BitWidth, unsigned OrigBitWidth) {
+ assert(BitWidth <= OrigBitWidth && "Unexp
nikic wrote:
I think this change would benefit from an RFC on discourse, for wider
visibility.
Something that's not super clear to me is how to reconcile the statements about
pointer/integer casts and in-memory type punning. I'd expect that ptrtoint
returns an i128 value and if you cast back
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
A tentative LGTM. I *think* this particular change is fine, but it's a
dangerous area because all of AA basically does not support pointers of vectors
at all and treats them as escapes. Wouldn't surprise me if this causes a
miscompile.
http
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112365
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111984
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/110827
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111246
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/110815
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -4386,34 +4386,59 @@ void SelectionDAGBuilder::visitGetElementPtr(const User
&I) {
// it.
IdxN = DAG.getSExtOrTrunc(IdxN, dl, N.getValueType());
+ SDNodeFlags ScaleFlags;
+ // The multiplication of an index by the type size does not wrap the
+ //
@@ -4386,34 +4386,59 @@ void SelectionDAGBuilder::visitGetElementPtr(const User
&I) {
// it.
IdxN = DAG.getSExtOrTrunc(IdxN, dl, N.getValueType());
+ SDNodeFlags ScaleFlags;
+ // The multiplication of an index by the type size does not wrap the
+ //
@@ -4386,34 +4386,59 @@ void SelectionDAGBuilder::visitGetElementPtr(const User
&I) {
// it.
IdxN = DAG.getSExtOrTrunc(IdxN, dl, N.getValueType());
+ SDNodeFlags ScaleFlags;
+ // The multiplication of an index by the type size does not wrap the
+ //
nikic wrote:
fp16 support is generally quite broken outside of a few targets -- from a Rust
perspective, we'd prefer full support in LLVM 20 rather than backporting things
piecemeal to LLVM 19. Especially if it's going to change the ABI, which I think
means we'd need LLVM-patch-version-specifi
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109476
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109502
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -234,19 +225,12 @@ class SmallSet {
/// Check if the SmallSet contains the given element.
bool contains(const T &V) const {
if (isSmall())
- return vfind(V) != Vector.end();
-return Set.find(V) != Set.end();
+ return llvm::is_contained(Vector, V);
+
nikic wrote:
Do I understand correctly that a side effect of this change is to change the
half float ABI on loongarch from passing via FP regs to passing via GPR regs?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/109093
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing li
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108585
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108585
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -234,19 +225,12 @@ class SmallSet {
/// Check if the SmallSet contains the given element.
bool contains(const T &V) const {
if (isSmall())
- return vfind(V) != Vector.end();
-return Set.find(V) != Set.end();
+ return llvm::is_contained(Vector, V);
+
nikic wrote:
Maybe I misunderstood the question, but I think this should still go into
19.1.x, just doesn't need to be part of the 19.1.0 release.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108397
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commit
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108783
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
Looks reasonable to me.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108816
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-b
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108585
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108585
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -234,19 +225,12 @@ class SmallSet {
/// Check if the SmallSet contains the given element.
bool contains(const T &V) const {
if (isSmall())
- return vfind(V) != Vector.end();
-return Set.find(V) != Set.end();
+ return llvm::is_contained(Vector, V);
+
nikic wrote:
This is a fix for a slow compilation issue, and it's not an LLVM 19 regression,
so it's fine if this doesn't go into the 19.1.0 release.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108397
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-com
https://github.com/nikic requested changes to this pull request.
This change has already been reverted on main because it breaks clang bootstrap
and causes assertion failures. This was already known at the time it was
accepted as "low risk" here. Please exercise at least a minimum amount of due
nikic wrote:
I don't think this should be backported in the current form, because it breaks
ABI. This is not strictly impossible at this stage, but also very undesirable.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106008
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106952
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
@alexey-bataev Do you think this should be backported?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104747
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-com
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106908
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic commented:
For this and https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/106540, I'm not
convinced that we should actually make the canonical `i8` type for ptradd byte
width dependent. The only thing that matters is that the used type has an alloc
size of one byte, so always
https://github.com/nikic commented:
I don't think this is the right direction for memset. I would prefer actually
overloading it and making the memset/memset.pattern distinction redundant. See
also https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/97583#issuecomment-2288302946
and following comments.
nikic wrote:
> That's fine - I only really use the comment release notes for post-final
> anyway.
We should disable the comment for RCs then :)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105627
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105797
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105314
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105314
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101521
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102741
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102881
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/104657
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
Could we have block renumbering produce a map from old to new numbers, which we
can then use for straightforward analysis updates?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/103400
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@l
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/103302
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
nikic wrote:
This test still doesn't look anything approaching minimal. Please run it
through llvm-reduce.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/103302
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lis
@@ -0,0 +1,918 @@
+; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py
UTC_ARGS: --version 5
+; RUN: opt -mtriple=arm64 -S < %s -passes=instcombine | FileCheck %s
nikic wrote:
Triple should not be needed.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-proje
@@ -0,0 +1,576 @@
+; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_test_checks.py
UTC_ARGS: --version 5
+; RUN: opt -mtriple=arm64
-passes='inline,function(sroa,jump-threading,instcombine)' -S < %s
| FileCheck %s
nikic wrote:
Why can't this be an in
https://github.com/nikic milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102646
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/102552
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
1 - 100 of 381 matches
Mail list logo
