On 8/3/23 08:56, Kito Cheng wrote:
That'll be the first thing to look at. THe costing change was supposed
only affect if-then-else constructs, not sets in general.
If so, I think the most simple fix is adding more checks on the set
cost - only check the SET_SRC is if-then-else?
No, the simple fix is to just remove the errant part of the commit :-0
My tests aren't done, but that does seem to dramatically help. Given it
wasn't supposed to go in as-is and it's causing major problems, I'll
probably just rip it out even though my testing isn't done.
OK, so I'm going to retreat from there, I've another lld issue that
needs to be fixed before the LLVM 17 release :)
Reversion of errant hunk has been pushed. Sorry for the problems folks.
Had I known it was going to have this kind of fallout, I would have
slammed a coke and fixed it last night before doing to sleep :-0
And yes, focusing on the lld issue seems wise given what I'm hearing in
the LLVM meeting.
Jeff
