aaron.ballman accepted this revision. aaron.ballman added a comment. In D92439#2431256 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D92439#2431256>, @jdoerfert wrote:
> In D92439#2429815 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D92439#2429815>, @jyu2 wrote: > >> In D92439#2429511 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D92439#2429511>, @jdoerfert >> wrote: >> >>> Still unsure if we should also error out for NVPTX but that is a different >>> story. Looks OK from my side, assuming you address the earlier comment. >> >> With this change if NVPTX need diagnostic for use of 128-bit integer, >> adding "bool hasInt128Type() const override { return false; }" in NVPTX.h is >> all needed. >> >>> Maybe someone else should accept though. >> >> Do you have suggestion whom I may contact for acceptance? We have customer >> needs for this... Thank you in advance. :-) > > You have the right people as reviewers, it sometimes need a few days. You can > ping it after a week without progress. FWIW, the changes LGTM but I don't know enough about the domain to know the answer for NVPTX. That said, this is still good incremental progress as-is. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D92439/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D92439 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
