Author: hfinkel
Date: Wed May 25 16:53:24 2016
New Revision: 270772
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=270772&view=rev
Log:
Add a loop's debug location to its llvm.loop metadata
Getting accurate locations for loops is important, because those locations are
used by the frontend to genera
hfinkel closed this revision.
hfinkel added a comment.
r270772, thanks!
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19739
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Author: hfinkel
Date: Wed May 25 17:08:27 2016
New Revision: 270775
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=270775&view=rev
Log:
[CGDebugInfo] Modify the preferred expression location for member calls.
If the callee has a valid location (not all do), then use that. Otherwise, fall
back to th
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL270775: [CGDebugInfo] Modify the preferred expression
location for member calls. (authored by hfinkel).
Changed prior to commit:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19708?vs=55610&id=58521#toc
Repository:
rL LL
>
> > /tmp/loc.cpp:3:8: note: 'y' declared here
>
> > void y();
>
> > ^
>
> > /tmp/loc.cpp:8:3: error: member function 'y' not viable: 'this'
> > argument has type 'const foo', but function is not marked const
>
&
- Original Message -
> From: "Rafael Espíndola via cfe-commits"
> To: "cfe-commits cfe"
> Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:55:25 PM
> Subject: Don't pass --build-id by default.
>
> We do it just because gcc in some distributions do it.
>
> I can see why --build-id is useful for distributi
hfinkel added a subscriber: hfinkel.
hfinkel added a comment.
FYI: There is now a specification, see:
http://sourcerytools.com/pipermail/cxx-abi-dev/2016-June/002919.html
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18035
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists
- Original Message -
> From: "Rafael Espíndola"
> To: "Hal Finkel"
> Cc: "cfe-commits cfe"
> Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 7:06:26 PM
> Subject: Re: Don't pass --build-id by default.
>
> > This is going to break a lot of my local rpm packaging scripts, and
> > I suspect the same is true
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D18035#448002, @DmitryPolukhin wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D18035#447473, @hfinkel wrote:
>
> > FYI: There is now a specification, see:
> > http://sourcerytools.com/pipermail/cxx-abi-dev/2016-June/002919.html
>
>
>
...
> But as far a
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D18035#450211, @andreybokhanko wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D18035#448057, @hfinkel wrote:
>
> > We just received the first draft of that specification yesterday.
>
>
> Is this specification confidential?
The link was posted here:
http
hfinkel added a comment.
Why are you removing 'F' from all of the builtin definitions? And if you need
to, why are you not removing them from copysign?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D5896
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lis
- Original Message -
> From: "Richard Smith via cfe-commits"
> To: "cfe-commits" , "Clang Dev"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:09:37 PM
> Subject: RFC: Default language standard mode policy
> Hi all!
> I'd like to establish a policy for Clang's default language standard
> (if none
- Original Message -
> From: "Richard Smith"
> To: "Hal Finkel"
> Cc: "Clang Dev" , "cfe-commits"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 3:01:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Default language standard mode policy
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Hal Finkel via cfe-dev <
> cfe-...@lis
- Original Message -
> From: "Hal Finkel via cfe-dev"
> To: "Richard Smith"
> Cc: "Clang Dev" , "cfe-commits"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 4:17:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] RFC: Default language standard mode policy
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Richard Smith"
>
hfinkel added a comment.
ping
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18639
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
hfinkel accepted this revision.
hfinkel added a reviewer: hfinkel.
hfinkel added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D5896
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D18639#472010, @chandlerc wrote:
> I'm fine with this change, but we should also get Steve to comment on it, and
> make sure we have a good way of explaining this to users.
>
> In particular, we probably need some documentation around these fas
hfinkel updated this revision to Diff 63029.
hfinkel added a comment.
Thanks everyone. I've rebased this and changed the name to __libcpp_*.
Marshall, how do you recommend rewriting the functions to reduce the
boilerplate?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18639
Files:
include/cmath
include/comple
hfinkel updated this revision to Diff 63394.
hfinkel added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: mcrosier.
Rebased. Recursive AST visitor (which John pointed out was bad because it
caused quadratic behavior and was wasteful in terms of code size) replaced with
a function with some loops over the
hfinkel created this revision.
hfinkel added reviewers: rjmccall, chandlerc, rsmith, dberlin.
hfinkel added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
Herald added a subscriber: mcrosier.
As part of D9403, John McCall asked to avoid making a DenseMap query per
emitted store instruction. This can be done by restr
Author: hfinkel
Date: Sun Jul 10 17:26:52 2016
New Revision: 275029
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=275029&view=rev
Log:
Update Clang tests after adding inference for the returned argument attribute
Adjusting tests after r275027.
Modified:
cfe/trunk/test/CodeGen/ppc64-struct-one
Author: hfinkel
Date: Sun Jul 10 23:52:07 2016
New Revision: 275043
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=275043&view=rev
Log:
Revert r275029 - Update Clang tests after adding inference for the returned
argument attribute
The associated backend change is causing miscompiles from the AArch
hfinkel added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D19544#484439, @spatel wrote:
> Hi Matt -
>
> This looks like the right first step in the path that Hal suggested, except I
> think we need a test case for each function that you want to enable. Please
> see test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/X86/
hfinkel added a comment.
Ping.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D18639
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
hfinkel added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D19544#485677, @mmasten wrote:
> Thanks for reviewing. One concern I have going forward is the number of
> entries that will appear in the switch statement inside
> addVectorizableFunctionsFromVecLib(). I assume that the right thing to do is
Author: hfinkel
Date: Sat Jul 16 02:22:09 2016
New Revision: 275679
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=275679&view=rev
Log:
Revert "Revert r275029 - Update Clang tests after adding inference for the
returned argument attribute"
This reverts commit r275043 after reapplying the underlyin
hfinkel added a subscriber: hfinkel.
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17741#367113, @weimingz wrote:
> Add "-f__FILE__-prefix-to-remove" flag to support the trim of the prefix.
> Passing special value __ALL_DIR__ to remove all dir parts.
>
> For example FILE is /a/b/c
> -f_
hfinkel added a subscriber: hfinkel.
hfinkel added a comment.
I'm *really* nervous about doing anything with
-f(no-)delete-null-pointer-checks that makes it look like we support this
feature without actually supporting it in the backend.
In computePointerICmp in InstructionSimplify.cpp, we hav
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17993#370793, @chandlerc wrote:
> If we're not going to fully implement "fdelete-null-pointer-checks" we
> shouldn't claim to... I'm really worried about us accepting that flag and not
> actually honoring it.
>
> However, I *do* think this sh
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17993#370790, @rjmccall wrote:
> Hal, I think you're talking about a slightly different thing. This patch is
> adding an assumption that C++ this pointers are non-null, but only when
> -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks is not passed. The flag
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17993#371459, @chandlerc wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17993#371454, @hfinkel wrote:
>
> > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17993#370793, @chandlerc wrote:
> >
> > > If we're not going to fully implement "fdelete-null-pointer-checks" we
> >
hfinkel added a subscriber: hfinkel.
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D18051#372490, @tra wrote:
> Ugh. Found more problems with using vector types in C++. Abandoning the idea.
I'm curious, what problems?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18051
___
[+Richard]
- Original Message -
> From: "Artem Belevich"
> To: reviews+d18051+public+fb9c7f3f37ff8...@reviews.llvm.org
> Cc: "Justin Lebar" , "Jingyue Wu"
> , "Hal Finkel" , "cfe-commits"
>
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 6:38:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] D18051: [CUDA] Provide CUDA's
- Original Message -
> From: "Reid Kleckner via cfe-commits"
> To: "David Blaikie"
> Cc: "cfe-commits"
> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 10:39:18 AM
> Subject: Re: r264205 - [CUDA] Don't define __NVCC__.
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:30 AM, David Blaikie via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@li
- Original Message -
> From: "Adam Nemet"
> To: cfe-comm...@cs.uiuc.edu
> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 12:51:50 PM
> Subject: r226298 - [AVX512] Add intrinsics for masked aligned FP loads and
> stores
>
> Author: anemet
> Date: Fri Jan 16 12:51:50 2015
> New Revision: 226298
>
> UR
- Original Message -
> From: "Renato Golin via cfe-commits"
> To: "Stephen Canon"
> Cc: "Clang Commits"
> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 3:51:23 AM
> Subject: Re: r253269 - Make FP_CONTRACT ON the default.
>
> On 16 November 2015 at 23:09, Stephen Canon via cfe-commits
> wrote:
> > A
Hi Andrey,
This commit does not seem to match the description. What is it doing?
Thanks again,
Hal
- Original Message -
> From: "Andrey Bokhanko via cfe-commits"
> To: cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2015 6:18:23 AM
> Subject: r254195 - [x86] Exclusion of incorre
hfinkel added a comment.
In http://reviews.llvm.org/D15195#310395, @mcrosier wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D15195#307136, @hfinkel wrote:
>
> > Can you use a StringSet instead of a vector and avoid all (most) of the
> > code iterating over the vector of builtins being disabled?
>
>
> Hi Ha
201 - 238 of 238 matches
Mail list logo
