https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
LGTM with CI passing.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144094
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-b
https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144101
___
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/ldionne approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144110
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
ldionne wrote:
The rationale for cherry-picking this "feature" into the release is that we
want to gain experience with this and be able to ship a robust version of this
in the next release, non-experimentally.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150481
__
https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150481
___
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/ldionne approved this pull request.
libc++ changes LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151695
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bra
@@ -77,5 +77,5 @@ using E = test{}>;
// expected-error@-1 {{non-type template parameter has non-literal type
'std::array'}}
using F = test{}>;
-// expected-error@-1 {{type 'std::array' (aka
'array, 2>') of non-type template parameter is not a
structural type}}
+// expected-
@@ -95,5 +95,5 @@ using H = test{}>;
// expected-error@-1 {{non-type template parameter has non-literal type
'std::pair'}}
using I = test{}>;
-// expected-error@-1 {{type 'std::pair' (aka
'pair, basic_string>') of non-type template parameter
is not a structural type}}
+// e
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ using H = test{}>;
// expected-error@-1 {{non-type template parameter has non-literal type
'std::pair'}}
using I = test{}>;
-// expected-error-re@-1 {{type 'std::pair<{{(std::)?}}string,
{{(std::)?}}string>'{{( \(aka 'std::pair'\))?}} of
non-type template
@@ -48,12 +48,12 @@ void pointer_to_incomplete_type() {
void function_pointer() {
{
volatile std::atomic fun;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'!is_function::value'{{.*}}Pointer to function isn't allowed}}
+// expected-error-
@@ -51,12 +51,12 @@ void pointer_to_incomplete_type() {
void function_pointer() {
{
volatile std::atomic fun;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'!is_function::value'{{.*}}Pointer to function isn't allowed}}
+// expected-error-
@@ -25,9 +25,9 @@ int main(int, char**) {
{
std::map, std::allocator> s1;
std::map, test_allocator> s2;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'is_same>::value'{{.*}}Allocator::value_type
must be same type as value_type}}
+//
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ using E = test{}>;
// expected-error-re@*:* {{non-type template parameter has non-literal type
'std::array'}}
using F = test{}>;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{type 'std::array<{{(std::)?}}string,
2U{{L{0,2}.*}}>' {{(\(aka 'array, 2UL{0,2}>'\) )?}}of
non-type
@@ -48,12 +48,12 @@ void pointer_to_incomplete_type() {
void function_pointer() {
{
volatile std::atomic fun;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'!is_function::value'{{.*}}Pointer to function isn't allowed}}
+// expected-error-
@@ -25,9 +25,9 @@ int main(int, char**) {
{
std::map, std::allocator> s1;
std::map, test_allocator> s2;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'is_same>::value'{{.*}}Allocator::value_type
must be same type as value_type}}
+//
@@ -48,12 +48,12 @@ void pointer_to_incomplete_type() {
void function_pointer() {
{
volatile std::atomic fun;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'!is_function::value'{{.*}}Pointer to function isn't allowed}}
+// expected-error-
@@ -25,9 +25,9 @@ int main(int, char**) {
{
std::multimap, std::allocator> s1;
std::multimap, test_allocator> s2;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'is_same>::value'{{.*}}Allocator::value_type
must be same type as value_type}
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ int main(int, char**)
// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'1ULL == 0 || 1ULL < 1ULL'{{.*}}linear_congruential_engine invalid parameters}}
std::linear_congruential_engine e3;
std::linear_congruential_engine e4;
-
@@ -51,12 +51,12 @@ void pointer_to_incomplete_type() {
void function_pointer() {
{
volatile std::atomic fun;
-// expected-error-re@*:* {{static assertion failed due to requirement
'!is_function::value'{{.*}}Pointer to function isn't allowed}}
+// expected-error-
https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
I reviewed the libc++ changes. I suggest we take the opportunity to make those
more robust to future changes without really reducing their bug-finding power.
I made my change suggestions such that you should be able to apply them as a
batc
https://github.com/ldionne edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/148014
___
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/ldionne edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151652
___
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/ldionne commented:
High level comments and questions:
IIUC, the goal here is for the compiler to be able to apply e.g. pointer
authentication on fields of these structs automatically. It can't do so if they
are standard layout types, because then users are technically allowe
https://github.com/ldionne commented:
I just saw https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151651 -- I probably
should have looked at that one before this PR, but they appeared in the wrong
order in my list.
I do agree with what @philnik777 said in that other review -- I think we need
additio
https://github.com/ldionne edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151652
___
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/ldionne requested changes to this pull request.
Needs RFC
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151652
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-b
@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
+#
===--===##
+#
+# 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: Apache-
@@ -2555,6 +2645,72 @@ def generate_header_test_directory(self, path: os.path)
-> None:
f.write(self.generate_header_test_file(header))
+@functools.cached_property
+def status_list_table(self) -> str:
+"""Creates the rst status table using a l
https://github.com/ldionne edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139774
___
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/ldionne approved this pull request.
I am really excited for this change! This looks really good, with a few
comments.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139774
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.ll
@@ -102,51 +102,25 @@ if [[ "${runtimes}" != "" ]]; then
exit 1
fi
- echo "--- ninja install-clang"
-
- ninja -C ${BUILD_DIR} install-clang install-clang-resource-headers
-
- RUNTIMES_BUILD_DIR="${MONOREPO_ROOT}/build-runtimes"
- INSTALL_DIR="${BUILD_DIR}/install"
-
https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153064
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
ldionne wrote:
> I'd really like to know what the "fallout" here is before we merge something
> into a release branch that has perfectly defined behaviour.
The fallout is that some people are running with
`-fsanitize=unsigned-integer-overflow` and that started breaking. In our case,
some folk
@@ -98,6 +99,8 @@
# endif
#endif
+#define _LIBCPP_ABI_TREE_POINTER_INT_PAIR
ldionne wrote:
Let's add some documentation for this. Also (or only?) in the `.rst` docs?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147681
__
https://github.com/ldionne commented:
LGTM but let's A/B measure this to see whether there is a visible impact. I'm
especially looking for a regression caused by more expensive pointer chasing
since we have to "decode" the pointer now. If we don't see issues with this, I
think I'd be OK with m
ldionne wrote:
/libcxx-bot benchmark libcxx/test/benchmarks/join_view.bench.cpp
libcxx/test/benchmarks/hash.bench.cpp
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158138
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://list
ldionne wrote:
/libcxx-bot benchmark libcxx/test/benchmarks/join_view.bench.cpp
libcxx/test/benchmarks/hash.bench.cpp
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158138
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://list
https://github.com/ldionne closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158138
___
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/ldionne edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147681
___
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/ldionne updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158138
>From c1f5a45299ae0b228662e002e8a37f1f93ac3a71 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Louis Dionne
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 15:29:07 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Dummy commit
---
foo | 0
1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 de
https://github.com/ldionne created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158138
None
>From c1f5a45299ae0b228662e002e8a37f1f93ac3a71 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Louis Dionne
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 15:29:07 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Dummy commit
---
foo | 0
1 file changed, 0 insertions(+)
https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/155251
___
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/ldionne milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154961
___
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/ldionne created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154961
This patch adds unit tests to catch the regression described in #154146. At the
moment, these tests are pinning down the post-break ABI.
(cherry picked from commit 2a83cf5d0e592890f74c5d5ff4a30ae4cf54b61b)
>Fr
https://github.com/ldionne closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154961
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
ldionne wrote:
Closing since we aren't targeting LLVM 20 anymore. Vendors who want to
cherry-pick this fix are encouraged to do so on their own.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154961
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@
ldionne wrote:
> Anyways, my real objection here was that the underlying issue isn't addressed
> - namely that we have no coverage for the integer sanitizer. Since there is a
> party willing to fix that now I'm happy with merging this.
To clarify, the issue I am fixing with this patch is a br
https://github.com/ldionne converted_to_draft
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/158138
___
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/ldionne edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147679
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -132,18 +139,18 @@ unsigned __tree_sub_invariant(_NodePtr __x) {
if (__x->__left_ == __x->__right_ && __x->__left_ != nullptr)
return 0;
// If this is red, neither child can be red
- if (!__x->__is_black_) {
-if (__x->__left_ && !__x->__left_->__is_black_)
+ if
https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
LGTM with nitpicks.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147679
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bra
501 - 551 of 551 matches
Mail list logo
