Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "r274457".
2016 Jul 06
4
Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR? (related to PR28400)
...a problem in practice since the analysis will
hopefully be invalidated and stop holding the dangling pointers, but it
just seems weird. Thankfully, ASan can generally catch problems if we do
try to access through any of these dangling pointers.
Thoughts? For the moment I have put in a workaround (r274457) that makes
jump-threading invalidate LVI.
-- Sean Silva
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160705/ceeb69a2/attachment.html>
2017 Jan 23
6
Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR? (related to PR28400)
This thread kinda died. I'd like to revive it.
The new PM stuff is making excellent progress, and this is actually one of
the last things to clean up.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 1:10 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thoughts? For the moment I have put in a workaround (r274457) that makes
> jump-threading invalidate LVI.
>
>
> Is everybody happy with this workaround?
>
I wasn't too happy with it, but I had no better suggestion.
As the infrastructure matured, what I think is a substantially less
horrible workaround is available in the form of what I i...
2016 Jul 12
2
Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR? (related to PR28400)
...e this pattern).
There's a relatively simple workaround for now which is manually
invalidating LVI at the end of passes that use it (JumpThreading and
CorrelatedValuePropagation).
-- Sean Silva
>
>
> -- Sanjoy
>
>
> > Thoughts? For the moment I have put in a workaround (r274457) that makes
> > jump-threading invalidate LVI.
> >
> > -- Sean Silva
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160711/673ccac6/attachment.html>
2017 Jan 24
2
Should analyses be able to hold AssertingVH to IR? (related to PR28400)
...> The new PM stuff is making excellent progress, and this is actually one of the last things to clean up.
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 1:10 AM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com <mailto:chisophugis at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Thoughts? For the moment I have put in a workaround (r274457) that makes jump-threading invalidate LVI.
>
> Is everybody happy with this workaround?
>
> I wasn't too happy with it, but I had no better suggestion.
>
> As the infrastructure matured, what I think is a substantially less horrible workaround is available in the form of wh...