luismarques added a comment. LGTM. I'll let someone familiar with the old option explicitly approve it.
================ Comment at: clang/test/Driver/falign-loops.c:6-7 +// RUN: %clang -### -falign-loops=5 %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-5 +// RUN: %clang -### -falign-loops=8 %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-8 +// RUN: %clang -### -falign-loops=65537 %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-65537 +// RUN: %clang -### -falign-loops=a %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=CHECK-ERR-A ---------------- I would generally expect to see the `<= x` bound tested with `x` and `x+1`, not just `x+1`. ================ Comment at: llvm/test/CodeGen/RISCV/loop-alignment.ll:3-4 +; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=riscv64 | FileCheck %s +; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=riscv64 -align-loops=16 | FileCheck %s -check-prefix=ALIGN_16 +; RUN: llc < %s -mtriple=riscv64 -align-loops=32 | FileCheck %s -check-prefix=ALIGN_32 + ---------------- Nit: it's a convention of the RISC-V backend codegen tests to wrap the RUN lines. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D106701/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D106701 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
