[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add bugprone-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-10 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 194505. DennisL marked an inline comment as done. DennisL added a comment. Changed the following - addressed reviewer feedback - fetch the placement parameter as written - add further test cases as requested - stylistic changes - add nothrow parameter

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add bugprone-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-10 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL marked 12 inline comments as done. DennisL added a comment. In D60139#1460233 , @JonasToth wrote: > Hey Dennis, > > my 2cents on the check. I think it is very good to have! Did you check coding > guidelines if they say something to this issue?

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add bugprone-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-09 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 194283. DennisL added a comment. - handle array to ptr decay - updated error msg - additional tests for arry to ptr decay CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139 Files:

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add bugprone-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-08 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 194137. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139 Files: clang-tidy/bugprone/BugproneTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/bugprone/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/bugprone/PlacementNewTargetTypeMismatch.cpp

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add bugprone-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-08 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 194136. DennisL retitled this revision from "[clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check" to "[clang-tidy] Add bugprone-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check". DennisL added a comment. Removed debug output CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-08 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 194135. DennisL added a comment. The following has been updated: - moved check to bugprone instead of misc - more tests - rewritten check logic CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139 Files:

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-05 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL added a comment. In D60139#1456123 , @alexfh wrote: > Looks like this check would fit better into the `bugprone` module. Excellent suggestion. Thanks. Will follow up with an updated Diff. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-05 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 193839. DennisL marked an inline comment as done. DennisL added a comment. Sync ReleaseNotes.rst with docs CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139 Files: clang-tidy/misc/CMakeLists.txt

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check

2019-04-04 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 193715. DennisL marked an inline comment as done. DennisL retitled this revision from "[clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-size check" to "[clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-type-mismatch check". DennisL edited the summary of this revision.

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-size check

2019-04-03 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 193471. DennisL added a comment. Simplify logic CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139 Files: clang-tidy/misc/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/misc/MiscTidyModule.cpp

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-size check

2019-04-03 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 193454. DennisL added a comment. Remove debug output CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139 Files: clang-tidy/misc/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/misc/MiscTidyModule.cpp

[PATCH] D60139: [clang-tidy] Add misc-placement-new-target-size check

2019-04-03 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL updated this revision to Diff 193449. DennisL marked 13 inline comments as done. DennisL added a comment. Updated patch to address reviewer feedback CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60139 Files: clang-tidy/misc/CMakeLists.txt

[PATCH] D60139: Add clang-tidy/checks/misc-placement-new-target-size check

2019-04-02 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
DennisL created this revision. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, mgorny. Herald added a project: clang. Finds placement-new calls where the size of the pointee type of the placement parameter is smaller than the size of the constructed type and the pointer is implicitly cast to ``void *``

[PATCH] D37677: [libc++] implement future synchronization using atomic_flag

2017-10-02 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
dennis.luxen planned changes to this revision. dennis.luxen added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37677#868851, @EricWF wrote: > I agree with the general consensus that we should only make this change if > it's significantly faster, and only after we have a test that demonstrates >

[PATCH] D37677: [libc++] implement future synchronization using atomic_flag

2017-09-11 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
dennis.luxen added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37677#866362, @bcraig wrote: > Is there a benchmark where this demonstrates some performance improvement? I > fear that the switch to condition_variable_any will swamp any performance > gains from the switch to a spin lock. > > Also,

[PATCH] D37677: [libc++] implement future synchronization using atomic_flag

2017-09-11 Thread Dennis Luxen via Phabricator via cfe-commits
dennis.luxen created this revision. This task is listed in TODO.txt. The implementation swaps mutex against a spinlock based on atomic_flag. The spin lock itself is implemented as a nested class in a protected context of the associated state. https://reviews.llvm.org/D37677 Files: