Re: [PATCH] D48721: Patch to fix pragma metadata for do-while loops

2018-06-28 Thread Deepak Panickal via cfe-commits
It's a patch for a bug in clang.
I have requested for a Bugzilla account, however thought of putting up the
patch in the meantime.
Do I need to mark it '[Private]'?

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:41 PM Roman Lebedev via Phabricator <
revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> lebedev.ri added a comment.
>
> Test?
> (Or was this meant to contain `[Private]` in title?)
>
>
> Repository:
>   rC Clang
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D48721
>
>
>
>
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits


Re: [PATCH] D48721: Patch to fix pragma metadata for do-while loops

2018-06-28 Thread Deepak Panickal via cfe-commits
>
> Phab is the correct way to submit patches.
> But having a bugreport in bugzilla is good too.
> But the test will be needed regardless of the patch submission method.
> And yes, please do always upload all patches with full context (`-U9`).


Sorry about the context.
Can I add the test file to this patch itself? Or should that be another
patch?

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 3:08 PM Deepak Panickal via Phabricator <
revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> deepak2427 updated this revision to Diff 153316.
> deepak2427 added a comment.
>
> Add full context
>
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D48721
>
> Files:
>   lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp
>
>
> Index: lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp
> ===
> --- lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp
> +++ lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp
> @@ -777,19 +777,19 @@
>// Emit the body of the loop.
>llvm::BasicBlock *LoopBody = createBasicBlock("do.body");
>
> -  const SourceRange &R = S.getSourceRange();
> -  LoopStack.push(LoopBody, CGM.getContext(), DoAttrs,
> - SourceLocToDebugLoc(R.getBegin()),
> - SourceLocToDebugLoc(R.getEnd()));
> -
>EmitBlockWithFallThrough(LoopBody, &S);
>{
>  RunCleanupsScope BodyScope(*this);
>  EmitStmt(S.getBody());
>}
>
>EmitBlock(LoopCond.getBlock());
>
> +  const SourceRange &R = S.getSourceRange();
> +  LoopStack.push(LoopBody, CGM.getContext(), DoAttrs,
> + SourceLocToDebugLoc(R.getBegin()),
> + SourceLocToDebugLoc(R.getEnd()));
> +
>// C99 6.8.5.2: "The evaluation of the controlling expression takes
> place
>// after each execution of the loop body."
>
>
>
>
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits


Re: [PATCH] D48721: Patch to fix pragma metadata for do-while loops

2018-06-28 Thread Deepak Panickal via cfe-commits
I had based it on the other tests in clang/test/CodeGen.
Do we not need the `-o` to output to standard output?
Or did you mean something else?

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 10:25 PM Roman Lebedev via Phabricator <
revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> lebedev.ri added a comment.
>
> I'm not sure we can use `-O` in tests at all, and i'm not sure it is even
> needed here since you are only testing codegen.
>
>
> Repository:
>   rC Clang
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D48721
>
>
>
>
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits