alokkrsharma wrote: > I can't speak for the PGOVerify code itself, because PGO isn't my strong > suit, but the code in StandardInstrumentations.h looks good to me. However, > with so much of the patch left unreviewed by me, I don't feel like I can > approve it either. Please note the merge conflicts that need to be fixed up
Thanks for taking a look, I really appreciate the review. It's helpful to know that the pass-instrumentation integration looks reasonable, even if the PGO-specific parts are outside your area of expertise. Just to clarify, I'm not proposing this PR for immediate landing. The branch is primarily intended as a proof-of-concept to support the RFC discussion, validate the design on real pipelines, and evaluate the signal/noise characteristics of the verifier. I'll fix up the merge conflicts as well. Once the RFC direction becomes clearer, I expect the work would be split into smaller reviewable pieces rather than upstreamed as a single large change. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/196295 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
