[PATCH] D101387: [Clang] remove text extension from diag::err_drv_invalid_value_with_suggestion

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticDriverKinds.td:280 +def err_drv_small_columns : Error< +"invalid value '%1' in '%0', expected '%1' to be '%2' or greater">; nickdesaulniers wrote: > xbolva00 wrote: > > invalid

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. In D100581#2727460 , @aeubanks wrote: > regarding adding these to a warning group in a separate change, it's easier > to revert a smaller second change that adds this to warning groups, and > easier to iterate upon in tree

[PATCH] D101387: [Clang] remove text extension from diag::err_drv_invalid_value_with_suggestion

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticDriverKinds.td:280 +def err_drv_small_columns : Error< +"invalid value '%1' in '%0', expected '%1' to be '%2' or greater">; invalid value '%1' in '%0', value must be '%2' or

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. >> I've removed these warnings from the diagnostic groups -Wextra But to remove all false positives, you need reports from users of -Wextra. Otherwise this would be dead code with no users. I suggest to leave it in groups. Now you can ask folks to try this patch with

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. In D100581#2723794 , @nickdesaulniers wrote: > In D100581#2723789 , @mbenfield > wrote: > >> But gcc's behavior is to not trigger here so maybe following it is best. > > Perhaps file a

[PATCH] D99439: Update @llvm.powi to handle different int sizes for the exponent

xbolva00 added a comment. I think 16 bit int is same story as non 8-bit byte. There are places where we check for 32. Hard to say how many, what is the real scope of thiw change. if we allow 16bit int in upstream LLVM, we will just open door for non 8-bit byte.. Repository: rG LLVM Github

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 added a comment. In D100879#2714431 , @dmgreen wrote: > Hello. Nice idea. Unfortunately this blocks tail folding, making codesize a > bit bigger: https://godbolt.org/z/rncPvbh8d > I'm guessing it shouldn't? But the attribute isn't handled

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 added a comment. In D79714#2713921 , @nemanjai wrote: > In D79714#2713610 , @xbolva00 wrote: > >> I pushed a fix to just disable this warning for googlemock/gtest. > > There are still more of these. I will

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 added a comment. In D79714#2713311 , @nemanjai wrote: > This breaks Clang's ability to bootstrap LLVM with `-Werror` as evidenced by > the buildbot failure https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/36/builds/7587. > Please revert or fix the

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 added a comment. In D79714#2712393 , @uabelho wrote: > In D79714#2711898 , @xbolva00 wrote: > >> Can you try this fix? >> >> diff --git a/libcxx/utils/libcxx/test/params.py >>

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 added a comment. In D79714#2711871 , @uabelho wrote: > Hi, > > With this commit I get failures in the following testcases when building > check-runtimes on trunk: > > Failed Tests (29): > libc++ ::

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGc2297544c047: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others (authored by xbolva00). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 339912. xbolva00 added a comment. Updated comment for getNewAlign() CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879 Files: clang/include/clang/Basic/TargetInfo.h clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. I think this is good to go. Later anybody can build improvements on top of this patch and maybe work on some more powerful “dead stores” warnings. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100581/new/

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGabf3ca61e323: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment… (authored by xbolva00). Repository: rG LLVM Github

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 339734. xbolva00 added a comment. Use suggested flag names. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D79714/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D79714 Files: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td:158 +def DeprecatedCopy : DiagGroup<"deprecated-copy", [DeprecatedCopyUserProvided]>; +def DeprecatedCopyDtor : DiagGroup<"deprecated-copy-dtor", [DeprecatedCopyDtorUserProvided]>; def

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 added a comment. Ping @arthur.j.odwyer Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td:158 +def DeprecatedCopy : DiagGroup<"deprecated-copy", [DeprecatedCopyUserProvided]>; +def DeprecatedCopyDtor : DiagGroup<"deprecated-copy-dtor",

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. In D100581#2706467 , @dblaikie wrote: > FWIW, I'd love it if we could do a full dead-store warning, which would be a > superset of this. I think we have enough infrastructure in the analysis based > warnings (I think the

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. Thanks, looks really good. Meanwhile I collected some interesting testcases from gcc bugzilla (reported as false positives), please try: https://godbolt.org/z/747ndKEvd - No "unused-but-set" warnings expected. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST

[PATCH] D99790: [CGCall] Annotate `this` argument with alignment

xbolva00 added a comment. In D99790#2680857 , @jyknight wrote: > It seems like there's a bug with vtable thunks getting the wrong information. > This appears to be a pre-existing bug, but this change has caused it to start > actively breaking code. > >

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 339192. xbolva00 added a comment. Fixed small typo in tests. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879 Files: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp clang/test/CodeGen/alloc-fns-alignment.c Index:

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 339191. xbolva00 added a comment. Handle also aligned_alloc and memalign. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879 Files: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp clang/test/CodeGen/alloc-fns-alignment.c

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 added a comment. In D100879#2703979 , @rjmccall wrote: > Please addd tests, including tests that we suppress this assumption under > e.g. `-fno-builtin-malloc` Done CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 339189. xbolva00 added a comment. Added tests CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879 Files: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp clang/test/CodeGen/alloc-fns-alignment.c Index:

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 added a comment. GCC already knows about this guaranteed alignment, check: https://godbolt.org/z/sxn6K7Yq7 Alignment checks were optimized out. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp:2060 +case Builtin::BIstrndup: + RetAttrs.addAlignmentAttr(Context.getTargetInfo().getNewAlign() / +Context.getTargetInfo().getCharWidth());

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp:2059 +case Builtin::BIstrdup: +case Builtin::BIstrndup: + RetAttrs.addAlignmentAttr(Context.getTargetInfo().getNewAlign() / As a followup, I need to teach Clang

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 338950. xbolva00 added a reviewer: jdoerfert. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879 Files: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp Index: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGCall.cpp

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 added a comment. If this approach makes sense, I will update / add tests. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100879 ___ cfe-commits mailing list

[PATCH] D100879: [Clang] Propagate guaranteed alignment for malloc and others

xbolva00 created this revision. xbolva00 added reviewers: aaron.ballman, rjmccall. xbolva00 requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. LLVM should be smarter about *known* malloc's alignment and this knowledge may enable other

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. So I checked gcc on godbolt since gcc docs are not so clear. UnusedButSetParameter is ignored with: - -Wunused alone - -Wextra alone - -Wall -Wunused But works with -Wextra -Wunused or -Wall -Wextra. So I think we should put UnusedButSetParameter under -Wextra

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a subscriber: rsmith. xbolva00 added a comment. In D100581#2697697 , @mbenfield wrote: > In D100581#2693131 , @xbolva00 > wrote: > These warnings are not enabled by any other flags. This is

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 338336. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D79714/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D79714 Files: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticGroups.td clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclCXX.cpp

[PATCH] D79714: [Diagnostics] Restore -Wdeprecated warning when user-declared copy assignment operator is defined as deleted (PR45634)

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 338334. xbolva00 marked 5 inline comments as done. xbolva00 added a comment. Updated, addressed review feedback. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D79714/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D79714 Files:

[PATCH] D100509: Support GCC's -fstack-usage flag

xbolva00 added a comment. cc @r Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/CodeGenOptions.h:391 std::vector SanitizeCoverageBlocklistFiles; + std::string StackUsageOutput; Nit: comment? Like one in TargetOptions.h Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[PATCH] D100509: Support GCC's -fstack-usage flag

xbolva00 added a comment. In D100509#2693388 , @pzheng wrote: > I checked some of the functions in zstd where gcc outputs "dynamic,bounded", > but did not find any straightforward way to simplify them into standalone > tests. If anyone happen to have a

[PATCH] D100581: [Clang] -Wunused-but-set-parameter and -Wunused-but-set-variable

xbolva00 added a comment. >> These warnings are not enabled by any other flags. This is different from >> gcc, where -Wunused-but-set-variable is enabled by -Wextra in combination >> with either -Wunused or -Wall. IMHO we should follow gcc here. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES

[PATCH] D100509: Support GCC's -fstack-usage flag

xbolva00 added a comment. Great if better :) Please consider adding a small testcase (eg from zstd) where llvm says static and gcc says dynamic,bound. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100509/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100509

[PATCH] D100509: Support GCC's -fstack-usage flag

xbolva00 added a comment. Set current_function_has_unbounded_dynamic_stack_size to 1 when pushing a variable-sized argument onto the stack. if (current_function_has_unbounded_dynamic_stack_size) stack_usage_kind = DYNAMIC; else stack_usage_kind =

[PATCH] D100509: Support GCC's -fstack-usage flag

xbolva00 added a comment. >> :: gcc also supports "bounded" - do you plan to somehow handle it? (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Developer-Options.html#Developer-Options), eg: parser.c:918:5:parse_statement 48 dynamic,bounded Comment at:

[PATCH] D100509: Support GCC's -fstack-usage flag

xbolva00 added a comment. It would be great to also update release notes for clang to inform users about this new feature. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100509/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100509

[PATCH] D99517: Implemented [[clang::musttail]] attribute for guaranteed tail calls.

xbolva00 added a comment. Thanks, cool :) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D99517/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D99517 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D99517: Implemented [[clang::musttail]] attribute for guaranteed tail calls.

xbolva00 added a comment. Nice new feature! Please also update Release Notes for clang. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D99517/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D99517 ___ cfe-commits mailing

[PATCH] D97116: Reduce the number of attributes attached to each function

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CodeGenFunction.cpp:496 //function. - CurFn->addFnAttr("min-legal-vector-width", llvm::utostr(LargestVectorWidth)); + if (LargestVectorWidth) +CurFn->addFnAttr("min-legal-vector-width",

[PATCH] D98075: [Matrix] Implement += and -= for MatrixType

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/Sema/matrix-type-operators.c:22 // expected-error@-2 {{casting 'sx10x5_t *' (aka 'float __attribute__((matrix_type(10, 5)))*') to incompatible type 'float'}} + + b -= +=? Repository: rG LLVM

[PATCH] D97116: Reduce the number of attributes attached to each function

xbolva00 added a comment. In D97116#2596275 , @crownyanguan wrote: > However, this commit will cause performance regression. More details? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97116/new/

[PATCH] D97445: [clang][sema] Ignore xor-used-as-pow if both sides are macros

xbolva00 added a comment. No problem, +1 Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97445/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D97445 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D97116: Reduce the number of attributes attached to each function

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG053dc95839b3: Reduce the number of attributes attached to each function (authored by xbolva00). Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. Repository: rG LLVM Github

[PATCH] D89065: [clang] Tweaked fixit for static assert with no message

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Parse/ParseDeclCXX.cpp:874 /// [C++0x] static_assert-declaration: /// static_assert ( constant-expression , string-literal ) ; /// Do we warn for: static_assert(“my msg”)? I remember some

[PATCH] D96419: [clang] Add -ffinite-loops & -fno-finite-loops options.

xbolva00 added a comment. In D96419#2556349 , @fhahn wrote: > In D96419#213 , @xbolva00 wrote: > >> Maybe we want these options in llvm 12 as well? >> >> (+ Release note) > > That's a good idea. The patch

[PATCH] D96419: [clang] Add -ffinite-loops & -fno-finite-loops options.

xbolva00 added a comment. Maybe we want these options in llvm 12 as well? (+ Release note) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D96419/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D96419 ___ cfe-commits

[PATCH] D96419: [clang] Add -ffinite-loops & -fno-finite-loops options.

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:1923 + if (Arg *A = Args.getLastArg(OPT_save_temps_EQ)) +Opts.SaveTempsFilePrefix = Not needed Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D93040: [InlineFunction] Use llvm.experimental.noalias.scope.decl for noalias arguments.

xbolva00 added a comment. http://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=344afa853fcfcc085cb5c957b4a07c7ea013bb1b=2b9a834c43cb1f93d33958c14b695896bb4e9c1e=size-text Codesize regression 1% for tramp3d. Can you check it? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D94269: Adds -Wfree-nonheap-object to -Wmost

xbolva00 added a comment. Can you mention this new warning in release notes? https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94269/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D94269 ___ cfe-commits mailing list

[PATCH] D94827: [SimplifyCFG] Require and preserve dominator tree

xbolva00 added a comment. >> Code complexity Was there any RFC or general agreement? After many patches for this goal the pass is now more complex and harder to read.. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94827/new/

[PATCH] D94366: [Clang] Emit mustprogress for infinite C++ loops

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/attr-mustprogress-1.cpp:32 // void f1() { for (; 1;) Test for (; 42; )? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94366/new/

[PATCH] D94366: [Clang] Emit mustprogress for infinite C++ loops

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGStmt.cpp:797 if (llvm::ConstantInt *C = dyn_cast(BoolCondVal)) { if (C->isOne()) { EmitBoolCondBranch = false; Anything non-zero? Comment at:

[PATCH] D94367: [Clang][Driver] Add -ffinite-loops flags

xbolva00 added a comment. Just note: gcc enables -ffinite-loops with opt level -O2 and higher. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94367/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D94367 ___ cfe-commits

[PATCH] D86844: [LoopDeletion] Allows deletion of possibly infinite side-effect free loops

xbolva00 added a comment. In D86844#2484639 , @atmnpatel wrote: > In D86844#2484568 , @fhahn wrote: > >> In D86844#2481922 , @xbolva00 wrote: >> >>> int a, b; >>> >>>

[PATCH] D86844: [LoopDeletion] Allows deletion of possibly infinite side-effect free loops

xbolva00 added a comment. int a, b; int f(void) { while (1) { if (a != b) return 1; } return 0; } int g(int a, int b) { while (1) { if (a != b) return 1; } return 0; } LLVM does not catch these cases; gcc does.

[PATCH] D92812: [X86] AMD Znver3 (Family 19H) Enablement

xbolva00 added a comment. Patch title should be adjusted I think Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D92812/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D92812 ___ cfe-commits mailing list

[PATCH] D86844: [LoopDeletion] Allows deletion of possibly infinite side-effect free loops

xbolva00 added a comment. Do you plan to implement gcc’s option in Clang as followup? -ffinite-loops / -fno-finite-loops Assume that a loop with an exit will eventually take the exit and not loop indefinitely. This allows the compiler to remove loops that otherwise have no side-effects, not

[PATCH] D86844: [LoopDeletion] Allows deletion of possibly infinite side-effect free loops

xbolva00 added a comment. Can you reland this patch now? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D86844/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D86844 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D74436: Change clang option -ffp-model=precise to select ffp-contract=on

xbolva00 added a comment. Status? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D74436/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D74436 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D17993: [CodeGen] Apply 'nonnull' and 'dereferenceable(N)' to 'this' pointer arguments.

xbolva00 added a comment. In that code there is a comment: >> These flags are required for GCC 6 builds as undefined behaviour in OpenJDK >> code So you should really fix UB... Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D17993/new/

[PATCH] D66324: clang-misexpect: Profile Guided Validation of Performance Annotations in LLVM

xbolva00 added a comment. +1 for revert Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D66324/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D66324 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D17993: [CodeGen] Apply 'nonnull' to 'this' pointer arguments.

xbolva00 added a comment. In D17993#2325616 , @CJ-Johnson wrote: > In D17993#2325610 , @jdoerfert wrote: > >> Can you please upload again with full context? > > My apologies, I am new to LLVM contribution. What is

[PATCH] D87990: [Diagnostics] Diagnose -Wsizeof-array-div for array of pointers

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGcaf28b0a1288: [Diagnostics] Diagnose -Wsizeof-array-div for array of pointers (authored by xbolva00). Herald added a

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 accepted this revision. xbolva00 added a comment. >> I'll just say this LGTM as it establishes parity with what NewPM has been >> doing for a while already. +1 Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972/new/

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 added a comment. >> I'm not really sure what are my potential next steps here. Maybe just add option to disable late SROA? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 added a comment. >> Does that sound reasonable? Yes IMHO. >> What are the next suggested steps? It would be great to isolate and check the cases which regressed a bit. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972/new/

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 added a comment. X86 data collected by @lebedev.ri looks good as well. @greend for arm?:) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972 ___

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/Misc/loop-opt-setup.c:2 +// RUN: %clang -O1 -fexperimental-new-pass-manager -fno-unroll-loops -S -o - %s -emit-llvm | FileCheck %s -check-prefixes=CHECK-ALL,CHECK-NEWPM +// RUN: %clang -O1 -fno-experimental-new-pass-manager

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 added a comment. In D87972#2284060 , @MaskRay wrote: > I have tested this patch internally and seen gains and losses. On one > document search related benchmark 3~5% improvement. One zippy (snappy) there > is 3~5% regression. Perhaps we do need

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 added a comment. In D87972#2284060 , @MaskRay wrote: > I have tested this patch internally and seen gains and losses. On one > document search related benchmark 3~5% improvement. One zippy (snappy) there > is 3~5% regression. Perhaps we do need

[PATCH] D87972: [OldPM] Pass manager: run SROA after (simple) loop unrolling

xbolva00 added a comment. https://reviews.llvm.org/D68593 added late SROA to NPM so it would be good to enable it for LPM as well. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87972

[PATCH] D87163: [DSE] Switch to MemorySSA-backed DSE by default.

xbolva00 accepted this revision. xbolva00 added a subscriber: spatel. xbolva00 added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Thanks, amazing work! I agree that this should be enabled now and do not wait anymore. @nikic @spatel ? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[PATCH] D87163: [DSE] Switch to MemorySSA-backed DSE by default.

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/DeadStoreElimination.cpp:115 cl::desc("The number of memory instructions to scan for " "dead store elimination (default = 100)")); static cl::opt

[PATCH] D85097: [Sema] add warning for comparisons like 'x<=y<=z'

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/Sema/warn-compare-op-parentheses.c:49 + b = p1 > p2 < p3; + // expected-warning@-1 {{comparisons like 'x<=y<=z' are interpreted as '(x<=y ? 1 : 0) <= z'}} + // expected-note@-2 {{place parentheses around the '>'

[PATCH] D66324: clang-misexpect: Profile Guided Validation of Performance Annotations in LLVM

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:3457 + if (Diags.isIgnored(diag::warn_profile_data_misexpect, SourceLocation())) +Res.FrontendOpts.LLVMArgs.push_back("-pgo-warn-misexpect"); + rnk wrote: > Clang

[PATCH] D85844: [Driver] Change -fnostack-clash-protection to -fno-stack-clash-protection

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGdf3bfaa39071: [Driver] Change -fnostack-clash-protection to -fno-stack-clash-protection (authored by xbolva00). Repository: rG LLVM Github

[PATCH] D85844: [Driver] Change -fnostack-clash-protection to -fno-stack-clash-protection

xbolva00 created this revision. xbolva00 added a reviewer: sberg. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, dang. Herald added a project: clang. xbolva00 requested review of this revision. Clang command line docs mention `-fno-stack-clash-protection`, and GCC also uses -fno-stack-clash-protection.

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 added a comment. Thanks for feedback:) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D68720: Support -fstack-clash-protection for x86

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td:1778 + HelpText<"Enable stack clash protection">; +def fnostack_clash_protection : Flag<["-"], "fnostack-clash-protection">, Group, + HelpText<"Disable stack clash protection">;

[PATCH] D85568: [clang] Fix typo in comment

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG898880fe4e32: [clang] Fix typo in comment (authored by gousemoodhin, committed by xbolva00). Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 added a comment. And we caught one more bug in LLVM repo (in libcxx) const char* TestCaseSetOne[] = {"", "s", "bac", "bacasf" "lkajseravea", "adsfkajdsfjkas;lnc441324513,34535r34525234",

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGdc096a66cb51: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization (authored by xbolva00). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 added a comment. Thank you all for code review CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 284136. xbolva00 added a comment. Fixed nit CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545 Files: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 284128. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545 Files: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp clang/test/Sema/string-concat.c Index:

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 284127. xbolva00 added a comment. Addressed review notes. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545 Files: clang/include/clang/Basic/DiagnosticSemaKinds.td clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:6916 +for (unsigned i = 0; i < numConcat; ++i) + if (SL->getStrTokenLoc(i).isMacroID()) { +hasMacro = true; Quuxplusone wrote: > I wonder if perhaps the warning

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:6921 +if (!hasMacro) + Diag(SL->getBeginLoc(), diag::warn_concatenated_literal_array_init); + } riccibruno wrote: > Should this point to the location of the suspected

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 284043. xbolva00 marked 2 inline comments as done. xbolva00 added a comment. New testcases. Emit note to tell user how to supress warning - extra parentheses. Emit fixit with comma. Addressed review notes. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 added inline comments. Comment at: clang/test/Sema/string-concat.c:55 + "optional", + "packaged_task"}; Quuxplusone wrote: > > What if the user did actually want to concatenate the strings > > > Is there a

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 added a comment. Do not warn for macros (found false positives when compiling linux kernel) In D85545#2203660 , @NoQ wrote: > What if the user did actually want to concatenate the strings? Eg., one of > the strings in the list is long and

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 updated this revision to Diff 284002. xbolva00 added a comment. Do not warn for macros - found false positives when compiling linux kernel. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85545 Files:

[PATCH] D85545: [Diagnostics] Diagnose missing comma in string array initialization

xbolva00 created this revision. xbolva00 added a reviewer: aaron.ballman. Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. xbolva00 requested review of this revision. Motivation (from PR37674): const char *ss[] = { "foo", "bar", "baz", "qux" // <-- Missing comma!

[PATCH] D85287: Extend -Wtautological-bitwise-compare "bitwise or with non-zero value" warnings

xbolva00 added a comment. Looks useful, +1 CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85287/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85287 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >