nickdesaulniers accepted this revision. nickdesaulniers added a comment. In D135488#4049035 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D135488#4049035>, @paulkirth wrote:
> Actually if we add > > if (!isFunctionInPrintList(MF.getName())) > return false; > > we can filter by name Does name mangling complicate that? Perhaps a C++ user would give an unmangled name, but MF would be looking at mangled names? Anyways, it's not a pressing issue. I won't block this patch on that. I just redirect all the output to a file then scan that. Same thing about adding passes to -O0. Someone might care about that, but I don't. Nice work @paulkirth . I'm excited to use this to help us better understand and reduce our stack usage in the Linux kernel! ================ Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/AArch64/arm64-opt-remarks-lazy-bfi.ll:43-46 +; HOTNESS: Executing Pass 'Stack Frame Layout Analysis' +; HOTNESS-NEXT: Freeing Pass 'Machine Optimization Remark Emitter' +; HOTNESS-NEXT: Freeing Pass 'Lazy Machine Block Frequency Analysis' +; HOTNESS-NEXT: Freeing Pass 'Stack Frame Layout Analysis' ---------------- paulkirth wrote: > nickdesaulniers wrote: > > what's going on in this test? Looks like the pass is being run twice or > > something? > not sure I follow. The block here is executing the pass then freeing the > pass. I tried to follow the pattern used around this, but we could change it > to > > ``` > HOTNESS: Executing Pass 'Stack Frame Layout Analysis' > HOTNESS: Freeing Pass 'Stack Frame Layout Analysis' > ``` > and skip the rest Oops, I missed the first instance is `Executing` then the second is `Freeing`. NVM! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D135488/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D135488 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
