Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Relation between Register and MCRegister"
2020 Sep 29
2
Relation between Register and MCRegister
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 9:08 AM Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Register can represent virtual or physical registers.
> MCRegister can only represent physical registers.
>
That's what I thought, but MCRegister has some stack slot APIs.
> Eventually all Register instances are replaced by a MCRegister.
>
What happens in that case to the
2020 Sep 29
2
Relation between Register and MCRegister
Yes so long as you're including the invalid space too (IIRC it matters for DBG_VALUE in particular) the reason I didn't do that is that there's a lot more ctors than consumers of MCRegister. It seemed cheaper to do the checks when they're consumed and pretty much every consumer I encountered started with `assert(Reg.isPhysicalRegister() && ...)`.
> On 29 Sep 2020, at
2020 Sep 29
2
Relation between Register and MCRegister
> On 29 Sep 2020, at 09:28, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote:
>
> + Daniel who added the MCRegister class.
>
> Ah sorry, I replied too fast.
> I mixed up MCPhysReg with MCRegister.
>
> I was not aware we had such class.
>
> From a look at it, MCRegister are essentially the same thing as Register. I am guessing that the difference is Register
2020 Sep 30
2
Relation between Register and MCRegister
> On 29 Sep 2020, at 11:13, Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 11:09 AM Daniel Sanders <daniel_l_sanders at apple.com <mailto:daniel_l_sanders at apple.com>> wrote:
> Yes so long as you're including the invalid space too (IIRC it matters for DBG_VALUE in particular) the reason I didn't do that is that
2020 Nov 09
5
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have
output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example,
they check debug info. Adding // FIXME: comments shift that.
If the goal is easy identification of auto-inserted -allow-unused-prefixes
directives, how about:
- we make the flag an enum: true, false, and auto_inserted
- we use
2020 Nov 10
3
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020, 01:03 James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk>
wrote:
> I don't know if lit's parser is up to this (I suspect it isn't), but could
> you add a comment to the end/in the middle of a RUN? Something like `# RUN:
> do some thing | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=UNUSED --allow-unused-prefixes
> ## FIXME? That would avoid changing the line
2020 Nov 09
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
how about -allow-unused-prefixes=needs_review
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't feel too strongly about the "=true" bit for legitimate cases -
> I'd prefer not to have it, but it's not the end of the world.
> I do feel more strongly that if you're going to automatically add it
> to cases that might
2020 Nov 09
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
My preference would be to go with the tri-value option - I think the
downside of folks needing to write a value after "-allow-unused-prefixes"
is not that terrible; if folks feel that using true/false/auto is weird,
how about "allowed/disallowed/script_allowed" or something like that. I'd
argue that the value here is getting to the place where the default is
right (so we
2020 Nov 09
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 1:54 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:18 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > There's a wrinkle in this: some tests (clang ones, for instance) have
> output checks depending on the line position of the input. For example,
> they check debug info. Adding
2020 Nov 05
4
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 11:36 AM David Blaikie via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:46 AM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:40 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at
2020 May 01
2
[EXTERNAL] Re: arc diff says "disk is full"?
Could this issue also be related to an “AphrontQueryException #1030: Got error 28 from storage engine” error when browsing Phabricator?
~ Todd Snider
From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Hubert Tong via llvm-dev
Sent: Friday, May 1, 2020 9:15 AM
To: Mircea Trofin
Cc: Nicolai Hähnle via llvm-dev
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [llvm-dev] arc diff says "disk is
2020 Nov 06
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
I recently discovered that multi-line RUN statements can actually be
interrupted with non-RUN lines, without changing the behaviour. In other
words, you can do something like:
# RUN: some command --option1 \
## Comment
# CHECK: check something
# RUN: --option2
And you'd end up with "some command --option1 --option2" being run. It's
rather surprising behaviour, and not one
2020 Nov 06
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
I think it would make more sense to add it at each individual call site.
This ensures that all cases are fixed, rather than just one in a file. It
also ensures that in the (hopefully unlikely) event that there are both
intentional and unintentional use-cases within a file, each one gets
checked.
On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 20:29, Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
2020 Nov 05
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 10:40 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 7:30 AM Mircea Trofin via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> There are currently 1350 owner-less failures in the spreadsheet
>> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o6q3XH1n3DDyyccnYZ_kVfhFbTDzC_S09e973_cwYuw/edit#gid=0>.
2020 Nov 05
2
[RFC] FileCheck: (dis)allowing unused prefixes
There are currently 1350 owner-less failures in the spreadsheet
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1o6q3XH1n3DDyyccnYZ_kVfhFbTDzC_S09e973_cwYuw/edit#gid=0>.
These seem to be the larger areas there.
If you see an area you have ownership or expertise in, please sign up for
fixing the tests by Monday, Nov. 9.
Otherwise, I will "blanket-add" --allow-unused-prefixes=true to the
2015 Mar 06
2
[LLVMdev] Optimizing out redundant alloca involving byval params
On 03/05/2015 06:16 PM, Mircea Trofin wrote:
> Thanks!
>
> Philip, do you mean I should transform the original IR to something
> like this?
Yes.
> (...which is what -expand-struct-regs can do, when applied to my
> original input)
Sorry, what? This doesn't appear to be a pass in ToT. Are you using an
older version of LLVM? If so, none of my comments will apply.
>
2015 Mar 08
2
[LLVMdev] Optimizing out redundant alloca involving byval params
errata: I am on 3.6 full stop. I *thought* there was a 3.7 available, based
on the title of http://llvm.org/docs/ ("LLVM 3.7 documentation"). I suppose
the docs are ahead of the release schedule?
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 9:44 AM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote:
> Sorry, that phase is part of the PNaCl toolchain. This would be LLVM 3.6,
> would your comments still
2020 Apr 09
2
RFC: a practical mechanism for applying Machine Learning for optimization policies in LLVM
Sorry, I wasn't aware of that.
I can make the google doc view-only, keeping the current comments. I'll
wait a bit (few hrs) to see if there's any pushback to that.
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 9:57 AM Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com>
wrote:
> One suggestion : should we consolidate the discussion into the main
> thread? I know some folks are not willing to comment in
2020 Aug 28
4
End-to-end -fembed-bitcode .llvmbc and .llvmcmd
You should probably pull in some folks who implemented/maintain the feature
for Darwin.
I guess they aren't linking this info, but only communicating in the object
file between tools - maybe they flag these sections (either in the object,
or by the linker) as ignored/dropped during linking. That semantic could be
implemented in ELF too by marking the sections SHF_IGNORED or something
2020 May 01
2
arc diff says "disk is full"?
Hello,
I'm seeing what appears to be a serverside error - "Internal Server Error
FilesystemException: Failed to create a temporary directory: the disk is
full." if arc diff --trace. Anyone else getting this - any idea what to do?
Thanks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: