https://github.com/NuriAmari updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92331
>From 66ddf609c0e77867ec48c17136fb80d1e482041d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nuri Amari
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 16:33:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] Run ObjCContractPass in Distributed Thin-LTO Pipeline
Prior
https://github.com/NuriAmari updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92331
>From 66ddf609c0e77867ec48c17136fb80d1e482041d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nuri Amari
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 16:33:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Run ObjCContractPass in Distributed Thin-LTO Pipeline
Prior
https://github.com/cachemeifyoucan approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92331
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
NuriAmari wrote:
I've added the check back in, and reverted my custom check. There is too much
going on in https://reviews.llvm.org/D92808 for me to quickly understand
everything, but I don't see an obvious reason the check needed to be removed.
@ahatanaka Please let me know if I'm missing
https://github.com/NuriAmari updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92331
>From 66ddf609c0e77867ec48c17136fb80d1e482041d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nuri Amari
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 16:33:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Run ObjCContractPass in Distributed Thin-LTO Pipeline
Prior
cachemeifyoucan wrote:
> I couldn't find this check you're alluding to, so I added my own. If the
> check does exist, could you point me to it? If not, does mine look
> reasonable? Thanks.
I was answering from my memory, now I have to check. We have this function
`ModuleHasARC` which is used
NuriAmari wrote:
> it seems like this should just be in the default codegen pipeline? you'd need
> to change the pass to bail out early if there are no relevant intrinsics (by
> checking if the module contains the intrinsic declaration) to not affect
> compile times
I've done this, and
@@ -101,6 +101,19 @@ class ARCRuntimeEntryPoints {
llvm_unreachable("Switch should be a covered switch.");
}
+ bool moduleContainsARCEntryPoints() {
+assert(TheModule != nullptr && "Not initialized.");
+
+for (auto ARCInstricID :
+
https://github.com/NuriAmari updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92331
>From 66ddf609c0e77867ec48c17136fb80d1e482041d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nuri Amari
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 16:33:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Run ObjCContractPass in Distributed Thin-LTO Pipeline
Prior
cachemeifyoucan wrote:
> it seems like this should just be in the default codegen pipeline? you'd need
> to change the pass to bail out early if there are no relevant intrinsics (by
> checking if the module contains the intrinsic declaration) to not affect
> compile times
> it seems like
aeubanks wrote:
it seems like this should just be in the default codegen pipeline? you'd need
to change the pass to bail out early if there are no relevant intrinsics (by
checking if the module contains the intrinsic declaration) to not affect
compile times
kyulee-com wrote:
Because you now add it to `codegen` unconditionally, do you also need to delete
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/llvm/lib/LTO/LTOCodeGenerator.cpp#L141?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92331
___
cfe-commits
NuriAmari wrote:
> > Shouldn't this be added to the LTO code generator? In `libLTO` (used by
> > Apple's linker) it is added here `llvm/lib/LTO/ThinLTOCodeGenerator.cpp`
>
> Presumably because the pass is likely not useful unless targeting MachO, LLD
> does this via configuration hook:
https://github.com/NuriAmari updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92331
>From 66ddf609c0e77867ec48c17136fb80d1e482041d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nuri Amari
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 16:33:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Run ObjCContractPass in Distributed Thin-LTO Pipeline
Prior
14 matches
Mail list logo
