https://github.com/AaronBallman auto_merge_disabled
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150028
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
Removing my request changes, LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147308
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-
https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
The changes look good to me, but I'm leaving final sign-off to @erichkeane
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147308
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-b
AaronBallman wrote:
> @AaronBallman I’ve moved the diagnostic under the
> `-Wattribute-preprocessor-tokens` warning flag and made it a `pedantic`
> diagnostic, which will be triggered in C++. Is that the behavior you were
> aiming for?
Yup, this matches what I was thinking, thank you!
https:
https://github.com/AaronBallman closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154861
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
Because this can be hit by user-written expressions, I think an assert is
actually the wrong fix; we should handle it gracefully. Otherwise, in asserts
builds this is effectively a crash and in non-asserts builds it's still an
infinite recursion.
CC
https://github.com/AaronBallman auto_merge_enabled
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150028
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
AaronBallman wrote:
I was unable to get to the bottom of this and have run out of time before
heading out for WG14/sabbatical. If anyone wants to commandeer this PR and get
it across the finish line, that's perfectly fine by me. Otherwise I'll try to
get back on it in October.
https://github.
@@ -287,6 +287,11 @@ def err_function_needs_feature : Error<
"always_inline function %1 requires target feature '%2', but would "
"be inlined into function %0 that is compiled without support for '%2'">;
+def err_flatten_function_needs_feature
+: Error<"flatten functio
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM aside from a formatting nit
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154801
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-co
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154801
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154627
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2y -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2y -verify -fexperimental-new-constant-interpreter %s
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+
+void gh152826(char (*a)[*][5], int (*x)[_Countof (*a)]);
AaronBallman wrote:
I thought there was
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154627
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM! Do you need someone to land this on your behalf?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154861
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
@@ -16,7 +16,8 @@
#define _NULLPTR_T
#ifdef __cplusplus
-#if defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED)
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L ||
\
+(defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED))
@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
//
+// SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Portions Copyright 2025 Siemens and/or its
affiliates
+// May 2025 modified by Siemens and/or its affiliates b
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-linux-gnu -S -verify -o -
AaronBallman wrote:
```suggestion
// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-linux-gnu -emit-llvm -verify -o /dev/null
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150044
___
@@ -287,6 +287,10 @@ def err_function_needs_feature : Error<
"always_inline function %1 requires target feature '%2', but would "
"be inlined into function %0 that is compiled without support for '%2'">;
+def err_flatten_function_needs_feature
+: Error<"flatten functio
AaronBallman wrote:
Thanks! I can try to investigate from my side but I'm on Windows and I don't
typically build libc++ so it's possible I won't get very far. Due to timing, I
may not get back to this before October, so assistance is very much appreciated.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/
AaronBallman wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the libc++ failure is related. We're getting consistent
> failures on the premerge buildbot after this change landed:
>
> 1. https://lab.llvm.org/staging/#/builders/192/builds/1329
>
> 2. https://lab.llvm.org/staging/#/builders/192/builds/1330
>
>
AaronBallman wrote:
Also, the changes should come with a release note to
`clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst` so users know about the fix.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150044
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-linux-gnu -S -verify -o -
AaronBallman wrote:
```suggestion
// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-linux-gnu -emit-llvm -verify -o /dev/null
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150044
___
https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
Can you also add a test where the diagnostic is correctly suppressed because
the target does support the feature?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150044
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@list
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-linux-gnu -target-feature +sse4.1 -S
-verify -o -
AaronBallman wrote:
```suggestion
// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple=x86_64-linux-gnu -target-feature +sse4.1
-emit-llvm -verify -o /dev/null
```
https://github
@@ -287,6 +287,10 @@ def err_function_needs_feature : Error<
"always_inline function %1 requires target feature '%2', but would "
"be inlined into function %0 that is compiled without support for '%2'">;
+def err_flatten_function_needs_feature
+: Error<"flatten functio
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150044
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154767
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -16,7 +16,8 @@
#define _NULLPTR_T
#ifdef __cplusplus
-#if defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED)
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L ||
\
+(defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED))
https://github.com/AaronBallman created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154767
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#154599
It seems to be causing staging failures:
https://lab.llvm.org/staging/#/builders/192/builds/1329
https://lab.llvm.org/staging/#/builders/192/builds/1330
>From d72a
AaronBallman wrote:
> > do we need to update CFG and add tests for named loops with things like
> > reachability diagnostics? And do we need to update anything in the static
> > analyzer for this?
>
> I’m not too familiar w/ the static analyser but I can take a look at the CFG
> and see if th
@@ -215,6 +215,8 @@ def warn_c23_compat_case_range : Warning<
DefaultIgnore, InGroup;
def ext_c2y_case_range : Extension<
"case ranges are a C2y extension">, InGroup;
+def err_c2y_labeled_break_continue
+: Error<"labeled %select{'break'|'continue'}0 is only supported in
@@ -7213,7 +7213,8 @@ class Parser : public CodeCompletionHandler {
/// 'while', or 'for').
StmtResult
ParseStatement(SourceLocation *TrailingElseLoc = nullptr,
- ParsedStmtContext StmtCtx = ParsedStmtContext::SubStmt);
+ ParsedStmtContext
@@ -3056,26 +3045,50 @@ class IndirectGotoStmt : public Stmt {
}
};
-/// ContinueStmt - This represents a continue.
-class ContinueStmt : public Stmt {
-public:
- ContinueStmt(SourceLocation CL) : Stmt(ContinueStmtClass) {
-setContinueLoc(CL);
+/// Base class for BreakS
https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
I was only able to do a partial review, but once question I have is: do we need
to update CFG and add tests for named loops with things like reachability
diagnostics? And do we need to update anything in the static analyzer for this?
https://github.co
@@ -215,6 +215,8 @@ def warn_c23_compat_case_range : Warning<
DefaultIgnore, InGroup;
def ext_c2y_case_range : Extension<
"case ranges are a C2y extension">, InGroup;
+def err_c2y_labeled_break_continue
+: Error<"labeled %select{'break'|'continue'}0 is only supported in
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152870
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -10796,6 +10796,11 @@ def err_continue_not_in_loop : Error<
"'continue' statement not in loop statement">;
def err_break_not_in_loop_or_switch : Error<
"'break' statement not in loop or switch statement">;
+def err_break_continue_label_not_found
+: Error<"'%select{br
@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2y -verify -fsyntax-only -fblocks %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c23 -verify -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fnamed-loops %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -x c++ -verify -fsyntax-only -fblocks -fnamed-loops %s
+
+void f1() {
+ l1: while (true) {
+break
@@ -255,6 +255,10 @@ class Scope {
/// available for this variable in the current scope.
llvm::SmallPtrSet ReturnSlots;
+ /// If this scope belongs to a loop or switch statement, the label that names
AaronBallman wrote:
```suggestion
/// If this scope
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM! Please give @erichkeane a chance to sign off before landing, though
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150028
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists
https://github.com/AaronBallman closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154599
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
//
+// SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Portions Copyright 2025 Siemens and/or its
affiliates
+// May 2025 modified by Siemens and/or its affiliates b
@@ -16,7 +16,8 @@
#define _NULLPTR_T
#ifdef __cplusplus
-#if defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED)
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L ||
\
+(defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED))
https://github.com/AaronBallman closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154744
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman auto_merge_enabled
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154744
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,148 @@
+//===--- MethodHidingCheck.cpp - clang-tidy ===//
+//
+// SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2025 Siemens Corporation and/or its affiliates
AaronBallman wrote:
And here (I'll stop commenting)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-proje
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+# Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
+# See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
+# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Portions Copyright 2025 Siemens and/o
@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
//
+// SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Portions Copyright 2025 Siemens and/or its
affiliates
+// May 2025 modified by Siemens and/or its affiliates b
https://github.com/AaronBallman created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154744
I tracked down the document which changed the way variables are handled in for
loops for C99, it was the same document that allowed mixing code and
declarations but the editor's report made it seem like th
AaronBallman wrote:
> > libc++ failure appears to be unrelated:
> > ```
> > FAIL: llvm-libc++-shared.cfg.in ::
> > libcxx/utilities/tuple/no_specializations.verify.cpp (9116 of 10798)
> > TEST 'llvm-libc++-shared.cfg.in ::
> > libcxx/utilities/tuple/no_specializations.ve
AaronBallman wrote:
libc++ failure appears to be unrelated:
```
FAIL: llvm-libc++-shared.cfg.in ::
libcxx/utilities/tuple/no_specializations.verify.cpp (9116 of 10798)
TEST 'llvm-libc++-shared.cfg.in ::
libcxx/utilities/tuple/no_specializations.verify.cpp' FAILED
**
@@ -16,7 +16,8 @@
#define _NULLPTR_T
#ifdef __cplusplus
-#if defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED)
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L ||
\
+(defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED))
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM, thank you for checking the performance characteristics of the change! I
think we need a release note, though.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154610
___
cfe-commits mailing li
@@ -16,7 +16,8 @@
#define _NULLPTR_T
#ifdef __cplusplus
-#if defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED)
+#if __cplusplus >= 201103L ||
\
+(defined(_MSC_EXTENSIONS) && defined(_NATIVE_NULLPTR_SUPPORTED))
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154671
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -15345,6 +15345,13 @@ bool IntExprEvaluator::VisitUnaryExprOrTypeTraitExpr(
const auto *VAT = Info.Ctx.getAsVariableArrayType(Ty);
assert(VAT);
if (VAT->getElementType()->isArrayType()) {
+ // Variable array size expression could be missing (e.g. int a[*][10
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2y -verify %s
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -std=c2y -verify -fexperimental-new-constant-interpreter %s
+// expected-no-diagnostics
+
+void gh152826(char (*a)[*][5], int (*x)[_Countof (*a)]);
AaronBallman wrote:
We should also add
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154623
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154599
The C++ standard requires stddef.h to declare all of its contents in the global
namespace. We were only doing it when trying to be compatible with Microsoft
extensions. Now we expose in C++11 or later, in
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
Thanks for the fix! LGTM modulo the test request from @zwuis
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154545
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cg
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM again!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153527
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM! Though it would be helpful to add some information about why it's being
reverted to the PR summary/commit message.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154369
___
cfe-commits maili
AaronBallman wrote:
/cherry-pick ae434cd
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -2170,6 +2172,12 @@ ExprResult Sema::BuildLambdaExpr(SourceLocation
StartLoc, SourceLocation EndLoc,
PopExpressionEvaluationContext();
+sema::AnalysisBasedWarnings::Policy WP =
+AnalysisWarnings.getPolicyInEffectAt(EndLoc);
+// We cannot release LSI un
https://github.com/AaronBallman closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
>From 2dabc7de6840fb092c411a3e494ced6e970f5c47 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaron Ballman
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 10:43:35 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [C] Fix issue with -Wimplicit-void-ptr-cast
The change
AaronBallman wrote:
Windows failures are unrelated, other PRs are having the same issue:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154342
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154347
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
___
cfe-commits
AaronBallman wrote:
I believe the Windows failure is unrelated, but we'll see what precommit CI
comes back with this time. I wasn't able to reproduce the crash locally on my
Windows machine, though.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
__
@@ -9317,14 +9317,14 @@ AssignConvertType
Sema::CheckAssignmentConstraints(QualType LHSType,
// If we have an atomic type, try a non-atomic assignment, then just add an
// atomic qualification step.
if (const AtomicType *AtomicTy = dyn_cast(LHSType)) {
-AssignConvert
https://github.com/AaronBallman updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
>From 2dabc7de6840fb092c411a3e494ced6e970f5c47 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaron Ballman
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 10:43:35 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [C] Fix issue with -Wimplicit-void-ptr-cast
The change
AaronBallman wrote:
> I think the conversion is dropped in `Sema::CheckAssignmentConstraints`. It
> isn't assigning `CK_NonAtomicToAtomic` to `Kind` because `result` is
> `AssignConvertType::CompatibleVoidPtrToNonVoidPtr`, not
> `AssignConvertType::Compatible`.
>
> ```
> // If we have an at
AaronBallman wrote:
Because this is fixing an issue introduced in Clang 21, there's no release note
because I plan to backport the fix to the release branch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lis
https://github.com/AaronBallman created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
The changes from https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136855 missed a
change with atomic assignment constraints. This fixes a bug where we'd
accidentally drop a non-atomic-to-atomic conversion step.
https://github.com/AaronBallman milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154351
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
AaronBallman wrote:
> For what it's worth, this causes `-Wstring-concatenation` to pop up a few
> times in the Linux kernel. Two of the instances are simple enough to resolve
> under the kernel's "Do not split user visible strings regardless of length"
> rule.
>
> ```
> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc
https://github.com/AaronBallman edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154298
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -322,6 +322,9 @@ AST Matchers
- Add a boolean member ``IgnoreSystemHeaders`` to ``MatchFinderOptions``. This
allows it to ignore nodes in system headers when traversing the AST.
+- ``hasConditionVariableStatement`` now supports ``for`` loop, ``while`` loop
+ and ``switch
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154298
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
AaronBallman wrote:
> > The comments in this area are confusing me, FWIW:
> > ```
> > /// Stores the TagDecl associated with this type. The decl may point to
> > any
> > /// TagDecl that declares the entity.
> > TagDecl *decl;
> >
> > ...
> >
> > TagDecl *getOriginalDecl() const { re
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM! I think we're ready to make the jump now. But I'd love to hear if
@aaronpuchert or @delesley have any concerns, so give them a chance to weigh in
before landing.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152853
_
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM modulo release note nit.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153912
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commi
https://github.com/AaronBallman closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154120
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman auto_merge_enabled
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154120
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154120
Incompatible pointer to integer conversion diagnostic checks would trigger an
assertion when the designated initializer is for an array of unknown bounds.
Fixes #154046
>From bd8afef4c8eb29f001b9e06fb35aa
@@ -3684,6 +3684,11 @@ def warn_alloca_align_alignof : Warning<
"second argument to __builtin_alloca_with_align is supposed to be in bits">,
InGroup>;
+def warn_alloc_size
+: Warning<
+ "allocation of insufficient size '%0' for type %1 with size '%2'">,
+
@@ -144,6 +144,11 @@ New Compiler Flags
Deprecated Compiler Flags
-
+- Use of ``__has_feature`` to detect the ``ptrauth_qualifier`` and
``ptrauth_intrinsics``
AaronBallman wrote:
This isn't really a deprecated compiler flag. Perhaps w
@@ -7818,6 +7819,35 @@ ExprResult Sema::CheckExtVectorCast(SourceRange R,
QualType DestTy,
return prepareVectorSplat(DestTy, CastExpr);
}
+/// Check that a call to alloc_size function specifies sufficient space for the
+/// destination type.
+static void CheckSufficientAllo
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154018
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
AaronBallman wrote:
> @AaronBallman @tJener I've addressed all of you comments and hope this PR is
> now good to merge. Could you give it one last review? Am I supposed to mark
> the discussions we had as Resolved or is that up to you?
I gave it a review and my LG, but let's wait a bit for @tJ
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
The new docs look awesome to me, thank you!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/148277
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
AaronBallman wrote:
After the latest discussions, I think this PR can be closed?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/153104
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -1528,6 +1528,9 @@ static void InitializePredefinedMacros(const TargetInfo
&TI,
#undef TARGET_OS
}
+ if (LangOpts.PointerAuthIntrinsics)
+Builder.defineMacro("__PTRAUTH__");
AaronBallman wrote:
I'm happy with `__PTRAUTH__`; do we want it to expand
@@ -144,6 +144,11 @@ New Compiler Flags
Deprecated Compiler Flags
-
+- Use of `__has_feature` to detect the `ptrauth_qualifier` and
`ptrauth_intrinsics`
+ features has been deprecated, and is restricted to the arm64e target only.
The
+ correct metho
@@ -1089,6 +1089,7 @@ static void ComputeDATE_TIME(SourceLocation &DATELoc,
SourceLocation &TIMELoc,
/// specified by the identifier as a standard language feature.
static bool HasFeature(const Preprocessor &PP, StringRef Feature) {
const LangOptions &LangOpts = PP.getLangOp
https://github.com/AaronBallman approved this pull request.
LGTM!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152596
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -500,12 +707,892 @@ type. Implementations are not required to make all bits
of the result equally
significant; in particular, some implementations are known to not leave
meaningful data in the low bits.
+Standard ``__ptrauth`` qualifiers
+^
AaronBallman wrote:
> > > Static analysis flagged that the non-static member Semantics was not
> > > initialized by the default default constructor. Fix is to initialize it
> > > using in class member initialization.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, this might be one better to mark as Intentional in the sta
AaronBallman wrote:
> > Thanks! However, for the following piece of code
> > `getOriginalDecl()` called on the pointed-to type gives the
> > forward-declaration from the 3rd line, and the forward-declaration from the
> > 1st line for its canonical type.
>
> Yes that is correct.
>
> The 3rd li
AaronBallman wrote:
> Hi @AaronBallman I noticed that this commit makes a difference on the example
> below.
>
> ```
> #include
> typedef const struct T * T_Ref;
> static T_Ref _Atomic x = ATOMIC_VAR_INIT((void*)NULL);
> ```
>
> After this commit, the AST of the global variable declaration ch
1 - 100 of 3251 matches
Mail list logo
