[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

MarkMurrayARM marked 2 inline comments as done. MarkMurrayARM added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/ARM/ifcvt-branch-weight.ll:21 -; CHECK: bb.2.bb2: +; CHECK: bb.1.bb: ; CHECK: successors: %bb.4(0x4000), %bb.3(0x4000) dmgreen wrote: > I

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

dmgreen accepted this revision. dmgreen added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Thanks for the updates. LGTM. Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/ARM/ifcvt-branch-weight.ll:21 -; CHECK: bb.2.bb2: +; CHECK: bb.1.bb: ; CHECK: successors: %bb.4(0x4000),

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

dmgreen added a comment. The actual code change looks fine to me, providing we can clean up these test changes a bit and no-one else has any other comments. Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/ARM/2013-05-05-IfConvertBug.ll:196 ; Hard-coded registers comes from the ABI. ; CHECK-LA

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

MarkMurrayARM marked 3 inline comments as done. MarkMurrayARM added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/ARM/ifcvt-branch-weight.ll:22 +; CHECK: bb.1.bb2: +; CHECK: successors: %bb.2(0x4000) dmgreen wrote: > I'm not sure this is still checking any

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

DavidSpickett added a comment. FWIW, a 2 stage build on armv8 with `-mthumb` didn't turn up any codegen Gremlins. (that's how I saw the unused var) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D118044/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D118044 ___

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

john.brawn added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/ARM/2013-05-05-IfConvertBug.ll:1-4 ; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=thumbv7-apple-ios -mcpu=cortex-a8 | FileCheck %s ; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=thumbv8 | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-V8 %s -; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=thumbv7

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

DavidSpickett added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:87 * Added support for the Armv8.1-M PACBTI-M extension. +* Removed the deprecation of ARMv8-A T32 Complex IT blocks. Such blocks + are now enabled by default, but may be turned off if required. No

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

dmgreen added a reviewer: samparker. dmgreen added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/ARM/hoist-and-by-const-from-lshr-in-eqcmp-zero.ll:498 +; THUMB8-NEXT:it pl +; THUMB8-NEXT:lslpl.w r1, r0, r ; THUMB8-NEXT:lsl.w r0, r0, r2 Can you make

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

MarkMurrayARM added a comment. In D118044#3266521 , @DavidSpickett wrote: > Please define what "complex" is, in the commit message and (if it doesn't > make the description a whole paragraph) the command line help. > > Given that we're flipping a defaul

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

DavidSpickett added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/ARM/AsmParser/ARMAsmParser.cpp:10977 -Warning(IDLoc, "deprecated instruction in IT block"); - } } MarkMurrayARM wrote: > DavidSpickett wrote: > > Is this warning something you'd st

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

DavidSpickett added a comment. I may have missed this in the many test changes but are we left with a test that demonstrates that the codegen restriction still works? I see some that set one or the other, any with both that would catch us breaking this feature later? Repository: rG LLVM Gith

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

MarkMurrayARM added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/ARM/AsmParser/ARMAsmParser.cpp:10977 -Warning(IDLoc, "deprecated instruction in IT block"); - } } DavidSpickett wrote: > Is this warning something you'd still want if you opted int

[PATCH] D118044: [ARM] Undeprecate complex IT blocks

DavidSpickett added a comment. Please define what "complex" is, in the commit message and (if it doesn't make the description a whole paragraph) the command line help. Given that we're flipping a default for v8 thumb targets does this warrant a release note? Comment at: llvm