@@ -1872,7 +1872,8 @@ example:
passes make choices that keep the code size of this function as small
as possible and perform optimizations that may sacrifice runtime
performance in order to minimize the size of the generated code.
-This attribute is incompatible
https://github.com/SLTozer closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/SLTozer updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
>From eccff5693ebcaac45a7ddf56cbb33a48de281041 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stephen Tozer
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:59:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [LLVM] Add new attribute `optdebug` to optimize for
debuggin
SLTozer wrote:
> looks good - a few bits should be committed separately from this change, so
> please do those first and then commit this change
Separate review opened up at: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/68967
For simplicity's sake I'll keep this patch as-is, and rebase it when th
@@ -2028,6 +2030,8 @@ example:
This attribute suggests that optimization passes and code generator passes
should make choices that try to preserve debug info without significantly
degrading runtime performance.
+This attribute is incompatible with the ``minsize`
@@ -1085,6 +1085,7 @@ The integer codes are mapped to well-known attributes as
follows.
* code 77: ``elementtype``
* code 78: ``disable_sanitizer_instrumentation``
* code 79: ``nosanitize_bounds``
+* code 88: ``optdebug``
dwblaikie wrote:
This could/should be
https://github.com/dwblaikie approved this pull request.
looks good - a few bits should be committed separately from this change, so
please do those first and then commit this change
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
___
cfe-commits mail
https://github.com/dwblaikie edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
SLTozer wrote:
Small ping - all comments have now been addressed now I think.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/SLTozer updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
>From 18f494a4006b4c21b364a91107d4a07ceaf88213 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stephen Tozer
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:59:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [LLVM] Add new attribute `optdebug` to optimize for
debuggin
https://github.com/SLTozer updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
>From 18f494a4006b4c21b364a91107d4a07ceaf88213 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stephen Tozer
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:59:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [LLVM] Add new attribute `optdebug` to optimize for
debuggin
@@ -1085,6 +1085,7 @@ The integer codes are mapped to well-known attributes as
follows.
* code 77: ``elementtype``
* code 78: ``disable_sanitizer_instrumentation``
* code 79: ``nosanitize_bounds``
+* code 88: ``optdebug``
aeubanks wrote:
if you're going to up
aeubanks wrote:
I think typically the verifier changes are done in the same change since they
match the LangRef change, but it doesn't matter too much as long as it gets
sdone.
The LangRef change should also mention the attributes this is incompatible with
(like `optnone`'s description)
http
SLTozer wrote:
Making this attribute mutually exclusive with `optdebug` and `optsize` is fine
with me - as a question for the esteemed reviewers of this patch, would it be
preferred to add this exclusivity and associated verifier checks in a separate
patch, or as part of this patch?
https://g
aeubanks wrote:
And same with `optsize`/`minsize` since those explicitly want as many
simplifications as possible which conflicts with `optdebug`
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
h
aeubanks wrote:
> Are there interactions between `optdebug` and other attributes that should be
> enforced by the verifier? Like, can't be mixed with `optnone`?
+1, this is basically "I want `-O1`" vs "I want `-O0`" so they must conflict
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
pogo59 wrote:
Are there interactions between `optdebug` and other attributes that should be
enforced by the verifier? Like, can't be mixed with `optnone`?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.l
@@ -2325,6 +2325,7 @@ void
CodeGenModule::SetLLVMFunctionAttributesForDefinition(const Decl *D,
B.addAttribute(llvm::Attribute::Naked);
// OptimizeNone wins over OptimizeForSize and MinSize.
+F->removeFnAttr(llvm::Attribute::OptimizeForDebugging);
--
@@ -2325,6 +2325,7 @@ void
CodeGenModule::SetLLVMFunctionAttributesForDefinition(const Decl *D,
B.addAttribute(llvm::Attribute::Naked);
// OptimizeNone wins over OptimizeForSize and MinSize.
+F->removeFnAttr(llvm::Attribute::OptimizeForDebugging);
--
@@ -2325,6 +2325,7 @@ void
CodeGenModule::SetLLVMFunctionAttributesForDefinition(const Decl *D,
B.addAttribute(llvm::Attribute::Naked);
// OptimizeNone wins over OptimizeForSize and MinSize.
+F->removeFnAttr(llvm::Attribute::OptimizeForDebugging);
--
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-debuginfo
Changes
This patch adds a new fn attribute, `optdebug`, that specifies that
optimizations should make decisions that prioritize debug info quality,
potentially at the cost of runtime performance.
This patch does not add any functional changes
https://github.com/SLTozer created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66632
This patch adds a new fn attribute, `optdebug`, that specifies that
optimizations should make decisions that prioritize debug info quality,
potentially at the cost of runtime performance.
This patch does not ad
22 matches
Mail list logo
