[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 closed this revision. vext01 added a comment. Just pushed this to main (04f6bf482b8641533274d28af5fdac7107da3344 ) Thanks everyone! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D128645/new/ https://reviews.llv

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 updated this revision to Diff 440887. vext01 added a comment. Fixed grammar bits. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D128645/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D128645 Files: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst Index: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:88 +#. Patches should be unified diffs with "infinite context" (i.e. using something + like `git diff -U99 main`). + hubert.reinterpretcast wrote: > Using `git diff` like this, there a

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:88 +#. Patches should be unified diffs with "infinte context" (i.e. using something + like `git diff -U 99 main`). + xbolva00 wrote: > vext01 wrote: > > xbolva00 wrote: > > > main is we

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 updated this revision to Diff 440647. vext01 added a comment. I've addressed the comments. I only linked `llvm-commits` (reusing the already defined rst link) as the other lists are referenced elsewhere. Typo also fixed. After fixing my `-U 99`, grepping the tree for `` in rst f

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:88 +#. Patches should be unified diffs with "infinte context" (i.e. using something + like `git diff -U 99 main`). + xbolva00 wrote: > main is weird example here imho. How comes? The do

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:419-421 -Your first commit to a repository may require the autogenerated email to be -approved by a moderator of the mailing list. -This is normal and will be done when the mailing list owner has time. --

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:87 -#. Patches should be made with ``git format-patch``, or similar (see special - commands for `Requesting Phabricator review via the web interface - `_ ). If you use a - different tool, make sure it

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:419-421 -Your first commit to a repository may require the autogenerated email to be -approved by a moderator of the mailing list. -This is normal and will be done when the mailing list owner has time. --

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:87-91 -#. Patches should be made with ``git format-patch``, or similar (see special - commands for `Requesting Phabricator review via the web interface - `_ ). If you use a - different tool, make sure i

[PATCH] D128645: Update developer policy.

vext01 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.rst:112-114 -When submitting patches, please do not add confidentiality or non-disclosure -notices to the patches themselves. These notices conflict with the LLVM -licensing terms and may result in your contribu

[PATCH] D45045: [DebugInfo] Generate debug information for labels.

vext01 added a comment. Got one! Here's a dumb program which simply adds 3 to 1 using a function. There is one label in the `add_3` function, named `XXXYYYZZZ`: ; ModuleID = 'mymod' source_filename = "mymod" define i32 @add_3(i32 %x) !dbg !3 { entry: %res = add i32 %x, 3, !dbg !9

[PATCH] D45045: [DebugInfo] Generate debug information for labels.

vext01 added a comment. Hi, I'm generating these labels from the Rust compiler, which is far from a minimal example. I'm actually conflicted about what should happen if code containing a label is removed, but the label is marked to be "retained". Maybe it does make sense for those to stay wit

[PATCH] D45045: [DebugInfo] Generate debug information for labels.

vext01 added a comment. Hi, I've been experimenting some more with this patch. It seems to me that if a label is optimised away, but you've requested it be preserved, then you get a DWARF label with a zero offset. Is that the expected behaviour? Should it be documented? E.g.: < 6><0x00

[PATCH] D45045: [DebugInfo] Generate debug information for labels.

vext01 added a comment. Hi HsiangKai, Thanks for the response. Indeed, I've just rolled back to just before the revert for now to experiment, but I do hope this change hits LLVM-7. Wishing you the best of luck with getting it merged! Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D45045

[PATCH] D45045: [DebugInfo] Generate debug information for labels.

vext01 added a comment. Looks like this was backed out (reverted) yesterday. I'm really interested in inserting DILabels from LLVM in my research project, so I hope it can be recovered. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D45045 ___ cf