search for: tyker1

Yes please. On Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 5:02 AM Tyker1 at outlook.com via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > a bit of time has passed and there to my knowledge still no strong > arguments against removing it. > is everyone OK to proceed with the removal ? > > Gauthier > ------------------------------ > *From:* C...

> On Apr 3, 2020, at 11:06 AM, Johannes Doerfert <johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> Is it worth it? I think it is. But I am not sure I see the whole picture - >> are there low-memory systems that need to run LLVM on? >> >> I am not sure what needs to be done to approve such a fundamental change; >> especially when we

Hi llvm-dev, I have a patch open for review that removes waymarking https://reviews.llvm.org/D77144. This patch removes waymarking and replaces it with storing a pointer to the User in the Use. when compiling the CTMark tests of the test suite, this give an average of +1.8% max memory use and -1.1% compile time. Removing Waymarking also simplifies the code of Use and User. Any thought?

...eed to run LLVM on? I am not sure what needs to be done to approve such a fundamental change; especially when we can't prove the Waymarking was needed at all. On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:10 PM Chris Lattner via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Apr 1, 2020, at 5:51 AM, Tyker1 at outlook.com via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > Hi llvm-dev, > > I have a patch open for review that removes waymarking > https://reviews.llvm.org/D77144. > > This patch removes waymarking and replaces it with storing a pointer to > the U...

Hello, As I can see, recently LLVM switched to using assume bundles to encode alignment information: https://reviews.llvm.org/rG78de7297abe2e8fa782682168989c70e3cb34a5c However, it seems that the ValueTracking cannot understand the new format. As an example, consider compilation of the following reproducer with clang-11 (old assume format) and clang-trunk (assume bundles): #include