[clang] [llvm] InstCombine: Enable SimplifyDemandedUseFPClass and remove flag (PR #81108)

https://github.com/arsenm created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81108 This completes the unrevert of ef388334ee5a3584255b9ef5b3fefdb244fa3fd7. >From 7b5b50597e13c647ec70beab35dcc9b643bff42f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matt Arsenault Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 14:15:33 +0530 Subject:

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Diagnosis for constexpr constructor not initializing a union member (PR #81042)

https://github.com/mahtohappy updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81042 >From 9271e67ab27f850413e3d6d6f1383454067efe75 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: mahtohappy Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 13:29:45 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Diagnosis for constexpr constructor not initializing a union

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an explicit object parameter in constant evaluator (PR #81102)

Sirraide wrote: Should I fix the conflict in the release notes myself, or should that be done when this gets merged? Because at least in my experience, merge conflicts in the release notes just keep reappearing if a pr stays open for some time...

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an explicit object parameter in constant evaluator (PR #81102)

https://github.com/Sirraide updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81102 >From d489acbd3cfb656d203e1f05b74c238351c5428a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sirraide Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 08:33:03 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [Clang] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an

[clang] [llvm] Reapply "InstCombine: Introduce SimplifyDemandedUseFPClass"" (PR #74056)

https://github.com/arsenm closed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74056 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Diagnosis for constexpr constructor not initializing a union member (PR #81042)

https://github.com/mahtohappy updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81042 >From 9271e67ab27f850413e3d6d6f1383454067efe75 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: mahtohappy Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 13:29:45 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Diagnosis for constexpr constructor not initializing a union

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an explicit object parameter in constant evaluator (PR #81102)

https://github.com/Sirraide edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81102 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an explicit object parameter in constant evaluator (PR #81102)

@@ -8480,6 +8480,54 @@ class LValueExprEvaluator }; } // end anonymous namespace +/// Get an lvalue to a field of a lambda's closure type. +static bool GetLambdaCaptureAsLValue(EvalInfo , const Expr *E, + LValue , const CXXMethodDecl *MD, +

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an explicit object parameter in constant evaluator (PR #81102)

Sirraide wrote: CC @AaronBallman, @cor3ntin, @shafik, @erichkeane, @Endilll https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81102 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an explicit object parameter in constant evaluator (PR #81102)

llvmbot wrote: @llvm/pr-subscribers-clang Author: None (Sirraide) Changes There were some bugs wrt explicit object parameters in lambdas in the constant evaluator: - The code evaluating a `CXXThisExpr` wasn’t checking for explicit object parameters at all and thus assumed that there was

[clang] [Clang][Sema] Properly get captured 'this' pointer in lambdas with an explicit object parameter in constant evaluator (PR #81102)

https://github.com/Sirraide created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81102 There were some bugs wrt explicit object parameters in lambdas in the constant evaluator: - The code evaluating a `CXXThisExpr` wasn’t checking for explicit object parameters at all and thus assumed that there

[clang] [Clang][AArch64] Warn when calling streaming/non-streaming about vect… (PR #79842)

@@ -3717,6 +3717,30 @@ def err_sme_definition_using_za_in_non_sme_target : Error< "function using ZA state requires 'sme'">; def err_sme_definition_using_zt0_in_non_sme2_target : Error< "function using ZT0 state requires 'sme2'">; +def

[clang] [clang][analyzer] Add note tags to alpha.unix.BlockInCriticalSection (PR #80029)

@@ -57,6 +61,12 @@ class BlockInCriticalSectionChecker : public Checker { const CallEvent , CheckerContext ) const; + CritSectionMarker getCriticalSectionMarker(const CallEvent , +

[clang] [llvm] Reapply "InstCombine: Introduce SimplifyDemandedUseFPClass"" (PR #74056)

https://github.com/arsenm updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74056 >From 9be777d5b39852cf3c0b2538fd5f712922672caa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matt Arsenault Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 18:00:13 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Reapply "InstCombine: Introduce SimplifyDemandedUseFPClass""

<    1   2   3   4   5