@@ -3597,8 +3597,13 @@ class ASTIdentifierTableTrait {
/// doesn't check whether the name has macros defined; use
PublicMacroIterator
/// to check that.
bool isInterestingIdentifier(const IdentifierInfo *II, uint64_t MacroOffset)
{
-if (MacroOffset || II->isPoisoned
@@ -3597,8 +3597,13 @@ class ASTIdentifierTableTrait {
/// doesn't check whether the name has macros defined; use
PublicMacroIterator
/// to check that.
bool isInterestingIdentifier(const IdentifierInfo *II, uint64_t MacroOffset)
{
-if (MacroOffset || II->isPoisoned
aeubanks wrote:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/4885 for why `#undef alloca` was
added
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
aeubanks wrote:
I'll send out a PR to remove that code, and potentially also remove the `#undef
alloca` separately
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/m
Endilll wrote:
@aeubanks Thank you reporting! I'll take a look momentarily
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
aeubanks wrote:
this seems to break `-fPIE` builds of clang on Linux with the following:
```
ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: alloca
>>> referenced by cc1_main.cpp
>>>
>>> tools/clang/tools/driver/CMakeFiles/clang.dir/cc1_main.cpp.o:(ensureStackAddressSpace())
```
the call to `al
https://github.com/Endilll closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
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! Precommit CI didn't run for Windows, but I tested the changes locally and
all tests came back clean for me.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
cfe-commits mailing list
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
>From 2823d38544d18213b5bf48c67e4eedd52acce850 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 20:30:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [clang] Refactor `IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID`
This
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
>From 2823d38544d18213b5bf48c67e4eedd52acce850 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 20:30:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] [clang] Refactor `IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID`
This
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
>From 2823d38544d18213b5bf48c67e4eedd52acce850 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 20:30:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang] Refactor `IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID`
This
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
>From 2823d38544d18213b5bf48c67e4eedd52acce850 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 20:30:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang] Refactor `IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID`
This
Endilll wrote:
Yeah, I remember I was able to get past the first round of test failures, only
to find another one waiting for me.
Once again I need to sit and debug AST serizalization and deserialization, but
I've been occupied with other stuff since then.
I'm not giving up on this just yet, as
AaronBallman wrote:
> @AaronBallman this looks sensible. WDYT?
It's sensible but still seems to be failing CI.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailm
cor3ntin wrote:
@AaronBallman this looks sensible. WDYT?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Endilll wrote:
Aaron suggested to me offline that `IsInterestingIdentifier` that I recently
changed could be implemented in a simpler way retaining the intent. That's what
the latest update about.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
___
c
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
>From 2823d38544d18213b5bf48c67e4eedd52acce850 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 20:30:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [clang] Refactor `IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID`
This
Endilll wrote:
Finally got past previous test failures. But the following tests started to
fail:
```
Clang :: AST/HLSL/pch.hlsl
Clang :: PCH/__va_list_tag-typedef.c
Clang :: PCH/builtin-is-constant-evaluated.cpp
Clang-Unit :: Lex/./LexTests/failed_to_discover_tests_from_gtest
```
Here is
https://github.com/Endilll updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
>From 2823d38544d18213b5bf48c67e4eedd52acce850 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vlad Serebrennikov
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 20:30:37 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [clang] Refactor `IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID`
This
Endilll wrote:
> Oh, I didn't look into the identifier's system before. I took a while to look
> at the patch but I failed to understand it and I failed to find the
> relationships between this patch and header units...
Yeah, the part this PR touches in not the most straightforward one. Thank
@@ -86,19 +87,26 @@ enum { IdentifierInfoAlignment = 8 };
static constexpr int ObjCOrBuiltinIDBits = 16;
/// The "layout" of ObjCOrBuiltinID is:
-/// - The first value (0) represents "not a special identifier".
-/// - The next (NUM_OBJC_KEYWORDS - 1) values represent ObjCKey
ChuanqiXu9 wrote:
Oh, I didn't look into the identifier's system before. I took a while to look
at the patch but I failed to understand it and I failed to find the
relationships between this patch and header units...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
@@ -86,19 +87,26 @@ enum { IdentifierInfoAlignment = 8 };
static constexpr int ObjCOrBuiltinIDBits = 16;
/// The "layout" of ObjCOrBuiltinID is:
-/// - The first value (0) represents "not a special identifier".
-/// - The next (NUM_OBJC_KEYWORDS - 1) values represent ObjCKey
Endilll wrote:
@ChuanqiXu9 Can I use some of your help? This PR breaks two module tests:
```
Clang :: Modules/cxx20-hu-04.cpp
Clang :: Modules/cxx20-module-file-info-macros.cpp
```
Apparently I somehow break import or export of header unit macros.
In `cxx20-module-file-info-macros.cpp`, the
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Vlad Serebrennikov (Endilll)
Changes
This patch refactors how values are stored inside
`IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID` bit-field, and annotates it with
`preferred_type`. In order to make the value easier to interpret by debuggers,
a ne
https://github.com/Endilll created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/71709
This patch refactors how values are stored inside
`IdentifierInfo::ObjcOrBuiltinID` bit-field, and annotates it with
`preferred_type`. In order to make the value easier to interpret by debuggers,
a new `ObjCKey
26 matches
Mail list logo
