similar to: [LLVMdev] How to interrupt PassManager optimizations flow?

There are two unexpected failures in the check-all (this check-all runs with self-build-clang): Failing Tests (2): Clang Tools :: clang-tidy/clang-tidy-diff.cpp Clang Tools :: clang-tidy/file-filter.cpp Last log: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x64-ninja-win7/builds/340/steps/ninja%20check%202/logs/stdio From: Yaron Keren [mailto:yaron.keren at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April

I actually run a in-house Phabricator instance with 400+ users and multiple git repo including custom extension developments I also follow the Phabricator development quite closely because we upgrade every couple of weeks I’d be more than happy to help maintain the phab instance for LLVM MyDeveloperDay On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 09:19, Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>

Hi All, This is to let you know that a new buildbot for Windows native LLVM/Clang testing is established: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x64-ninja-win7 . Hardware + OS configuration is: Haswell desktop with Windows 7 + Visual Studio 2013 Update 4. It is hosted by Intel and hopefully will contribute to improve quality of the LLVM/Clang on Windows being developed in the LLVM community.

Well, the point is CMOV_GR* are marked clobbering EFLAGS conservatively just in case they turn out to be lowered into a sequence containing XOR %reg,%reg which indeed clobbers EFLAGS. This means there might not be any instruction which actually uses this EFLAGS value. For an example we can look no further than the actual test which has been disabled after the fix

Haven't seen any discussions here. Does that mean that everybody agree on appointing George Rokos to be the code owner for the projects/openmp/libomptarget source tree? If so, can we have kind of formal approval so that the code_owners.txt file is updated and questions on libomptarget go to the right person then. BTW, the nominee was discussed at the libomptarget developers meeting, and

I tweaked the notifications yesterday, hopefully we don't see more spam storms. For filtering git refs: this is something that has changed substantially in Phabricator over the past couple of months, but I think I've managed to restrict notifications to only "master." (Although, again, this has changed a lot... getting this right depends on my own archaeological skills for

I agree, it is great. I have some regression tests (check-all) failures on Windows locally. Does the buildbot show the same? On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:16 AM Yaron Keren <yaron.keren at gmail.com> wrote: > That's great to hear! > > 2015-04-23 12:08 GMT+03:00 Fedorova, Vera <vera.fedorova at intel.com>: > >> Hi All, >> >> >> >> This is

+llvm-dev From: cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Bader, Alexey via cfe-dev Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 7:31 PM To: clang-dev developer list <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> Subject: [cfe-dev] FYI: LLVM Phabricactor notifications. Importance: Low Hi, I think some of contributors to the Clang received a notifications about some commits done in the past. I wanted

Hello everyone, If I understand correctly after the Metadata/Value split the Metadata support of RAUW is limited by ValueAsMetadata and MDNodeFwdDecl (i.e. until cycled in MDNode are not resovled). And my question is. Is where any way to replace an MDNode which is referenced by other MDNodes w\o iterating over all MDNodes in LLMVContext to find and replace those references? Unfortunately I

Hello, I was trying to use __attribute__((overloadable)) for functions accepting enumerated types but hadn't succeeded so far. Clang 3.1 and 3.2 failed to compile the following example. /* clang -x c foo.cpp */ typedef enum __One {DUMMY_1} One; typedef enum {DUMMY_2} Two; enum Three {DUMMY_3}; __attribute__((overloadable)) void foo(One); __attribute__((overloadable)) void foo(Two);

Hi, Bill and Jakob. I don't quite understand. I am talking about CMOV_GR* instructions which are conservatively marked as clobbering EFLAGS in X86InstrCompiler.td. Doesn't that mean there cannot be any use of EFLAGS in subsequent instructions before it is defined by some other instruction? I also don't understand the remark about resetting EFLAGS. What kind of reset is meant? In case

This sounds like llvm.org/pr13320. On 17 September 2013 18:20, Bader, Aleksey A <aleksey.a.bader at intel.com> wrote: > Hi all. > > > > I’m looking for an advice on how to deal with inefficient code generation > for Intel Nehalem/Westmere architecture on 64-bit platform for the attached > test.cpp (LLVM IR is in test.cpp.ll). > > The inner loop has 11 iterations

Hi Jakob, I've a problem related to the commit #155362. Consider the following snippet: void bar(float* f) { ... } void foo(float* f, int idx) { int hi = idx>>3; int lo = idx&7; bar(&f[hi*8+lo]); // hi*8 + lo == idx bar(&f[hi*10+lo]); } Before 155362 revision InstCombine was able to optimize hi*8+lo to idx by applying following patterns: 1. hi*8 -> hi << 3

On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 5:29 AM <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > One particular change: I've disabled notifications for the duplicate > Subversion meta-repos... so, for example, a commit to Clang will still get > 2 notifications (rL and rG). Before yesterday, this should have sent 3: one > each for rL, rG, and rC. Projects not in the monorepo will get > notifications

Hi, I'm trying to get AA results for two pointers, but it seems that AA cannot look though a memcpy. For example: define dso_local spir_func void @fun() { entry: ; Store an address of `var' %var = alloca i32, align 4 store i32 42, i32* %var, align 4 %var.addr = alloca i32*, align 8 store i32* %var, i32** %var.addr, align 8 ; Memcpy

Hello. I am not sure this is the right place to ask but here is my question. About a year ago there was a fix of some obscure bug (rdar://problem/8030636 which is located on the internal Apple bugtracker I believe and so not available to the general public :)) Some discussion can be found here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100531/102160.html. Unfortunately, no

On Fri, May 31, 2019, 10:02 AM Roman Lebedev via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:55 AM Manuel Klimek via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > We should be able to control the noise of these > > >, but I also wonder whether we can switch to github reviews as part of > the git move :) >

Hi all. I'm looking for an advice on how to deal with inefficient code generation for Intel Nehalem/Westmere architecture on 64-bit platform for the attached test.cpp (LLVM IR is in test.cpp.ll). The inner loop has 11 iterations and eventually unrolled. Test.lea.s is the assembly code of the outer loop. It simply has 11 loads, 11 FP add, 11 FP mull, 1 FP store and lea+mov for index

I believe (and I believe it was James who pointed this out on IRC) that Phabricator pulls in all refs, and GitHub stores PR commits under refs/pull. On 5/30/19, 3:37 PM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Tom Stellard via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: On 05/30/2019 10:04 AM, Sachkov, Alexey via llvm-dev wrote: >

On Jun 3, 2011, at 2:59 AM, Galanov, Sergey wrote: > Hi, Bill and Jakob. > > I don't quite understand. I am talking about CMOV_GR* instructions which are conservatively marked as clobbering EFLAGS in X86InstrCompiler.td. Doesn't that mean there cannot be any use of EFLAGS in subsequent instructions before it is defined by some other instruction? > > I also don't