https://github.com/matthias-springer edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112141
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
wangpc-pp wrote:
I added two experimental options: `-riscv-disable-latency-heuristic` and
`-riscv-should-track-lane-masks` and evaluated the statistics
(`regalloc.NumSpills`/`regalloc.NumReloads`) on llvm-test-suite (option: `-O3
-march=rva23u64`):
1. `-riscv-disable-latency-heuristic=true` an
wangpc-pp wrote:
Paste the data here as well
I added two experimental options: `-riscv-disable-latency-heuristic` and
`-riscv-should-track-lane-masks` and evaluated the statistics
(`regalloc.NumSpills`/`regalloc.NumReloads`) on llvm-test-suite (option: `-O3
-march=rva23u64`):
1. `-riscv
matthias-springer wrote:
> One question I have here is why not just insert right before the operation
> that is being replaced? What is the need for trying to insert after one of
> the values? Wouldnt' that remove the need for all of this complexity? It
> gives you a singular place to insert.
River707 wrote:
> > The only very high level conern I have is the use and need of
> > `InsertionPoint::after`. As I understand, this is a not-yet-implemented
> > optimization for the future for the purpose of reusing materializations by
> > calculating a better insertion point where it may dom
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
You can test this locally with the following command:
``bash
git-clang-format --diff 8a49434df62e394cd109f0189349b4d28dafa525
b59db4636891df96b7569c9737e361431f898909 --e
https://github.com/matthias-springer updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115816
>From b425caab826e5d9ad2f078d6f548f3215005bf7f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matthias Springer
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 05:14:43 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] replace with multiple
---
mlir/include/mlir/
matthias-springer wrote:
> The only very high level conern I have is the use and need of
> `InsertionPoint::after`. As I understand, this is a not-yet-implemented
> optimization for the future for the purpose of reusing materializations by
> calculating a better insertion point where it may do
@@ -0,0 +1,210 @@
+#===-- CMakeLists.txt
--===#
+#
+# Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
+# See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-
@@ -155,162 +50,131 @@ set(sources
product.cpp
pseudo-unit.cpp
ragged.cpp
- random.cpp
- reduce.cpp
- reduction.cpp
stat.cpp
- stop.cpp
sum.cpp
support.cpp
- temporary-stack.cpp
terminator.cpp
- time-intrinsic.cpp
tools.cpp
transformational.cpp
https://github.com/hvdijk updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114786
>From fb70629e196c516ebd5083f8624ba614f746ef67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: serge-sans-paille
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2024 09:14:35 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] =?UTF-8?q?[llvm]=20Fix=20=5F=5Fbuiltin=5Fobject=5Fsiz?=
=
ye-luo wrote:
> Are we still releasing 19?
yes. Point releases 19.1.x
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115944
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-
shiltian wrote:
Are we still releasing 19?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115944
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -179,19 +179,18 @@ like this:
```
$ flang -v -o example example.o
-"/usr/bin/ld" [...] example.o [...] "-lFortranRuntime" "-lFortranDecimal" [...]
+"/usr/bin/ld" [...] example.o [...] "-lflang_rt" [...]
```
The automatically added libraries are:
-* `FortranRuntime`: P
@@ -0,0 +1,210 @@
+#===-- CMakeLists.txt
--===#
+#
+# Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
+# See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+
+
+# Fortran Runtime (flang-rt)
+
+Flang-rt is the runtime library for code emitted by the Flang compiler
+(https://flang.llvm.org).
+
+
+## Getting Started
+
+There are two build modes for the flang-rt. The bootstrap build, also
+called the in-tree build, and
https://github.com/h-vetinari edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/110217
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -89,6 +91,9 @@ function(llvm_ExternalProject_Add name source_dir)
if(NOT ARG_TOOLCHAIN_TOOLS)
set(ARG_TOOLCHAIN_TOOLS clang)
+if (ARG_ENABLE_FORTRAN)
+ list(APPEND ARG_TOOLCHAIN_TOOLS flang-new)
h-vetinari wrote:
```suggestion
list(APP
@@ -290,11 +290,15 @@ static void processVSRuntimeLibrary(const ToolChain &TC,
const ArgList &Args,
ArgStringList &CmdArgs) {
assert(TC.getTriple().isKnownWindowsMSVCEnvironment() &&
"can only add VS runtime library on Windows!");
https://github.com/h-vetinari commented:
I did a first pass, and this looks like great work to me overall (though note
that I'm not necessarily the most qualified to judge there). But from what I
can see this will greatly improve a couple of existing pain points.
There's a bunch of places tha
llvmbot wrote:
@shiltian What do you think about merging this PR to the release branch?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115944
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
jhuber6 wrote:
> > This patch doesn't apply cleanly for me
>
> That's because it's a series of patches (see OP), so you have to apply them
> all in order (or simply check out the branch that represents this PR)
I thought that's what happens by default when you use
https://patch-diff.githubuse
h-vetinari wrote:
> This patch doesn't apply cleanly for me
That's because it's a series of patches (see OP), so you have to apply them all
in order (or simply check out the branch that represents this PR)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/110217
___
Author: Tarun Prabhu
Date: 2024-11-12T15:48:07-07:00
New Revision: 86e5163d2403cebb179815ea8ee012f13d273efd
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/86e5163d2403cebb179815ea8ee012f13d273efd
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/86e5163d2403cebb179815ea8ee012f13d273efd.diff
serge-sans-paille wrote:
For the record, I've just submitted
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115504 that fixes a few issues
related to the same kind of issues...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114786
___
llvm-branch-commits maili
jhuber6 wrote:
This patch doesn't apply cleanly for me
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/110217
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/llvmbot milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115944
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/llvmbot created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115944
Backport eccdb2489483ca58d2cb35bc38967a8e33117575
Requested by: @ye-luo
>From b82797185fcc335c0f517df8d2dd34658674e2df Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ye Luo
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 13:19:58 -0500
Subject: [PATC
hvdijk wrote:
Also cc @serge-sans-paille for the chance to comment since this now includes
changes of mine and is no longer a straightforward backport.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114786
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-c
https://github.com/hvdijk updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114786
>From fb70629e196c516ebd5083f8624ba614f746ef67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: serge-sans-paille
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2024 09:14:35 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] =?UTF-8?q?[llvm]=20Fix=20=5F=5Fbuiltin=5Fobject=5Fsiz?=
=
Artem-B wrote:
The CI check was unhappy because PR was based on the tree before 19.1.4. I've
rebased it on top of the most recent commit.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115081
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.l
https://github.com/Artem-B updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115081
>From ed0fe30e7d4da94b13018e563971524e013c512f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Manasij Mukherjee
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 15:15:30 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] [NVPTX] Promote v2i8 to v2i16 (#89)
Promote v2i8 to v2i1
https://github.com/llvmbot milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115892
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
kyulee-com wrote:
> Do we know why `OpIdx` is 4 here? This is confusing to me because it looks
> like there is only one argument, `%5`.
The `ignoreOp` function was initially designed for use with
`llvm::StructuralHashWithDifferences`, where it iterates over operands within
the same instructio
mshockwave wrote:
> This helps reduce register pressure for some cases.
Is it possible to provide some numbers to back this up? Preferably using some
well known benchmarks like SPEC and/or llvm-test-suite
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115858
ellishg wrote:
> Hit an assertion in `ignoreOp` when testing the refactored code.
>
> ```
> Assertion failed: (OpIdx < I->getNumOperands() && "Invalid operand index"),
> function ignoreOp, file GlobalMergeFunctions.cpp, line 129.
> Stop reason: hit program assert
> expr I->dump()
> %6 = tail
dschuff wrote:
oh nevermind, I was confused; #114693 is closed, but this is the PR that
implements the backport.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115844
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llv
https://github.com/ldionne approved this pull request.
I think this is reasonable to cherry-pick. It's fixing a somewhat more niche
use case, but if that's useful to @mgorny I think it makes sense to backport.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115892
michaelmaitland wrote:
For the recent scheduler patches, the common theme is we saw another target did
something brought that functionality to RISC-V. How do we know that these
changes are sensible defaults for RISC-V cores? Are you making measurements on
any cores? Are they in order, out of o
https://github.com/gbMattN updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108385
>From 82e7bec9acb33f2bd609e457ebe60febbc45e155 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matthew Nagy
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 12:36:57 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [TySan] Fix struct access with different bases
---
compiler
anutosh491 wrote:
Hi @aheejin
The checks pass as expected. I guess this should be ready !
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/l
https://github.com/choikwa approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114438
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
choikwa wrote:
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114438
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/gbMattN updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95387
>From 8099113d68bd7c47c29f635bb10a048ddb99833b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matthew Nagy
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:12:31 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [TySan] Fixed false positive when accessing global
object's m
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-libcxx
Author: None (llvmbot)
Changes
Backport 21da4e7f51c7adfd0b1c5defc8bd0d16ea1ce759
Requested by: @mgorny
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115892.diff
3 Files Affected:
- (modified) libcxx/cmake/Modules/HandleLibCXXABI.cm
https://github.com/gbMattN updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108385
>From 82e7bec9acb33f2bd609e457ebe60febbc45e155 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matthew Nagy
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 12:36:57 +
Subject: [PATCH] [TySan] Fix struct access with different bases
---
compiler-rt/
https://github.com/llvmbot created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115892
Backport 21da4e7f51c7adfd0b1c5defc8bd0d16ea1ce759
Requested by: @mgorny
>From 9a0c3e5488912da04e5465d0c3427ed21d23de0e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Louis Dionne
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:46:59 -0400
Subject:
aheejin wrote:
As I said I'm not a release maintainer. I don't have permission to merge
commits to release branches.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists
https://github.com/dschuff approved this pull request.
LGTM, although it looks like this is already done?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115844
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cg
aheejin wrote:
What do you mean by already done? This is a request to backport the fix to 19.4
release.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115844
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi
Author: Balazs Benics
Date: 2024-11-12T16:22:07+01:00
New Revision: fe90afe8b22a8c89dc418451c200be4a90229e34
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/fe90afe8b22a8c89dc418451c200be4a90229e34
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/fe90afe8b22a8c89dc418451c200be4a90229e34.diff
https://github.com/kyulee-com edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115750
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
kyulee-com wrote:
> Hit an assertion in `ignoreOp` when testing the refactored code.
>
> ```
> Assertion failed: (OpIdx < I->getNumOperands() && "Invalid operand index"),
> function ignoreOp, file GlobalMergeFunctions.cpp, line 129.
> Stop reason: hit program assert
> expr I->dump()
> %6 = ta
https://github.com/kyulee-com updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115750
>From 70dcb2ccba98b392c3539f349ccf7fec284a674c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kyungwoo Lee
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 10:06:56 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [CGData] Refactor Global Merge Functions
---
llvm/lib/Co
anutosh491 wrote:
I think one of the checks has been queued since quite some time but isn't
running.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi
ilya-biryukov wrote:
> @vgvassilev @ilya-biryukov @alexfh If I read correctly, the only blocker
> issue is the above reported performance issue. And I tried to split partial
> specialization from the full specialization table to avoid merging tables
> again and again. Could you please take ano
https://github.com/atrosinenko updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115185
>From 9cf30ea74f2f0d4ddc042224c65811ce682f0275 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Anatoly Trosinenko
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:56:40 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [AArch64][PAC] Eliminate excessive MOVs when comput
https://github.com/wangpc-pp edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115858
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-risc-v
Author: Pengcheng Wang (wangpc-pp)
Changes
This helps reduce register pressure for some cases.
---
Patch is 7.18 MiB, truncated to 20.00 KiB below, full version:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115858.diff
465 Files Affecte
https://github.com/wangpc-pp created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115858
This helps reduce register pressure for some cases.
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/
@@ -15440,9 +15440,25 @@ bool BoUpSLP::collectValuesToDemote(
MaskedValueIsZero(I->getOperand(1), Mask, SimplifyQuery(*DL)));
});
};
+auto AbsChecker = [&](unsigned BitWidth, unsigned OrigBitWidth) {
+ assert(BitWidth <= OrigBitWidth && "Unexp
https://github.com/gbMattN updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96507
>From c684ebd51c77f31a03eb874f5d09d4131c648b0b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matthew Nagy
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:48:53 +
Subject: [PATCH] [TySan] Improves compatability for tests
---
compiler-rt/test/ty
@@ -23,8 +24,8 @@ void f(int m) {
}
// CHECK: TypeSanitizer: type-aliasing-violation on address
- // CHECK-NEXT: READ of size 2 at {{.+}} with type short accesses an existing
object of type long long
- // CHECK-NEXT:in f violation-pr47137.c:30
+ // CHECK-NEXT:
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ int main(void) {
// CHECK: TypeSanitizer: type-aliasing-violation on address
// CHECK-NEXT: WRITE of size 8 at {{.+}} with type double accesses an
existing object of type float
- // CHECK-NEXT: in main violation-pr45282.c:25
+ // CHECK-NEXT: i
Author: SahilPatidar
Date: 2024-11-12T16:46:14+05:30
New Revision: d23ed7b82735b367501949541b7194bbb6b4fb86
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d23ed7b82735b367501949541b7194bbb6b4fb86
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d23ed7b82735b367501949541b7194bbb6b4fb86.diff
hvdijk wrote:
This more limited version is not enough to completely fix the incorrect results
in LLVM internally, but should be a strict improvement compared to what is
currently on `release/19.x`, passes the tests that were added, and in cases
where under the old API we cannot return the corr
https://github.com/hvdijk updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114786
>From fb70629e196c516ebd5083f8624ba614f746ef67 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: serge-sans-paille
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2024 09:14:35 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] =?UTF-8?q?[llvm]=20Fix=20=5F=5Fbuiltin=5Fobject=5Fsiz?=
=
https://github.com/zero9178 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115816
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/petar-avramovic updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112866
>From c59ad6e821a49e48df70edff1fdb044eb0083b1c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Petar Avramovic
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 14:10:57 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] MachineUniformityAnalysis: Improve isConstantOrUndefVa
@@ -1390,8 +1412,9 @@ void
ConversionPatternRewriterImpl::notifyOpReplaced(Operation *op,
isUnresolvedMaterialization = true;
// Create mappings for each of the new result values.
- for (auto [newValue, result] : llvm::zip(newValues, op->getResults())) {
-if (!ne
https://github.com/petar-avramovic updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112882
>From 3854308d10edc1329086faf26542ca469b26c589 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Petar Avramovic
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 15:37:59 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] AMDGPU/GlobalISel: RegBankLegalize rules for load
Add
https://github.com/vgvassilev approved this pull request.
LGTM, the risk of breaking binary compatibility and user base is very low.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.or
@@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
+#===-- unittests/CMakeLists.txt
===#
+#
+# Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
+# See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-
@@ -0,0 +1,198 @@
+
+
+# Fortran Runtime (flang-rt)
+
+Flang-rt is the runtime library for code emitted by the Flang compiler
+(https://flang.llvm.org).
+
+
+## Getting Started
+
+There are two build modes for the flang-rt. The bootstrap build, also
+called the in-tree build, and
tru wrote:
The force push was just a rebase to get it on the latest code.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115006
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bran
@@ -15440,9 +15440,25 @@ bool BoUpSLP::collectValuesToDemote(
MaskedValueIsZero(I->getOperand(1), Mask, SimplifyQuery(*DL)));
});
};
+auto AbsChecker = [&](unsigned BitWidth, unsigned OrigBitWidth) {
+ assert(BitWidth <= OrigBitWidth && "Unexp
https://github.com/zero9178 commented:
Looks mostly good to me besides some code nits :slightly_smiling_face:
The only very high level conern I have is the use and need of
`InsertionPoint::after`. As I understand, this is a not-yet-implemented
optimization for the future for the purpose of re
@@ -795,12 +795,32 @@ class ConversionPatternRewriter final : public
PatternRewriter {
/// patterns even if a failure is encountered during the rewrite step.
bool canRecoverFromRewriteFailure() const override { return true; }
- /// PatternRewriter hook for replacing an o
@@ -1497,15 +1530,33 @@ void ConversionPatternRewriter::replaceOp(Operation
*op, ValueRange newValues) {
impl->logger.startLine()
<< "** Replace : '" << op->getName() << "'(" << op << ")\n";
});
- impl->notifyOpReplaced(op, newValues);
+ SmallVector newVals(new
@@ -618,21 +618,27 @@ class SparseCallConverter : public
OpConversionPattern {
assert(!sparseFlat.empty());
if (sparseFlat.size() > 1) {
auto flatSize = sparseFlat.size();
-ValueRange fields(iterator_range(
-newCall.result_begin() + retO
@@ -795,12 +795,32 @@ class ConversionPatternRewriter final : public
PatternRewriter {
/// patterns even if a failure is encountered during the rewrite step.
bool canRecoverFromRewriteFailure() const override { return true; }
- /// PatternRewriter hook for replacing an o
@@ -618,21 +618,27 @@ class SparseCallConverter : public
OpConversionPattern {
assert(!sparseFlat.empty());
if (sparseFlat.size() > 1) {
auto flatSize = sparseFlat.size();
-ValueRange fields(iterator_range(
-newCall.result_begin() + retO
@@ -1497,15 +1530,33 @@ void ConversionPatternRewriter::replaceOp(Operation
*op, ValueRange newValues) {
impl->logger.startLine()
<< "** Replace : '" << op->getName() << "'(" << op << ")\n";
});
- impl->notifyOpReplaced(op, newValues);
+ SmallVector newVals(new
@@ -1417,12 +1441,21 @@ void
ConversionPatternRewriterImpl::notifyOpReplaced(Operation *op,
}
// Remap result to replacement value.
-if (newValue)
- mapping.map(result, newValue);
+if (!repl.empty()) {
+ if (repl.size() == 1) {
+// Single rep
@@ -618,21 +618,27 @@ class SparseCallConverter : public
OpConversionPattern {
assert(!sparseFlat.empty());
if (sparseFlat.size() > 1) {
auto flatSize = sparseFlat.size();
-ValueRange fields(iterator_range(
-newCall.result_begin() + retO
zero9178 wrote:
Should the changes here be part of the other PR?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115816
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/
https://github.com/anutosh491 ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115846
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: None (llvmbot)
Changes
Backport 075581f34035c01659cc883d0d69336c279ef0d5
Requested by: @aheejin
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848.diff
1 Files Affected:
- (modified) clang/lib/Interpreter/CMakeLists.txt (+
https://github.com/aheejin edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115844
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
anutosh491 wrote:
Yupp made the change. Have never seen such a message before and I wasn't even
sure as to why my mail was private. Is something more expected from my side ?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
___
llvm-branch-commits mail
@@ -66,9 +81,208 @@ FunctionPass *llvm::createAMDGPURegBankSelectPass() {
return new AMDGPURegBankSelect();
}
+class RegBankSelectHelper {
+ MachineIRBuilder &B;
+ MachineRegisterInfo &MRI;
+ AMDGPU::IntrinsicLaneMaskAnalyzer &ILMA;
+ const MachineUniformityInfo &MUI;
+
aheejin wrote:
> ⚠️ We detected that you are using a GitHub private e-mail address to
> contribute to the repo. Please turn off [Keep my email addresses
> private](https://github.com/settings/emails) setting in your account. See
> [LLVM
> Discourse](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/hidden-emails-
github-actions[bot] wrote:
⚠️ We detected that you are using a GitHub private e-mail address to contribute
to the repo. Please turn off [Keep my email addresses
private](https://github.com/settings/emails) setting in your account. See
[LLVM
Discourse](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/hidden-email
https://github.com/aheejin edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115844
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
https://github.com/anutosh491 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115846
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
anutosh491 wrote:
Closing as duplicate of #115848
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115846
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -69,3 +72,37 @@ AMDGPU::getBaseWithConstantOffset(MachineRegisterInfo &MRI,
Register Reg,
return std::pair(Reg, 0);
}
+
+IntrinsicLaneMaskAnalyzer::IntrinsicLaneMaskAnalyzer(MachineFunction &MF)
+: MRI(MF.getRegInfo()) {
+ initLaneMaskIntrinsics(MF);
+}
+
+bool Intr
llvmbot wrote:
@vgvassilev What do you think about merging this PR to the release branch?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
https://github.com/llvmbot created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
Backport 075581f34035c01659cc883d0d69336c279ef0d5
Requested by: @aheejin
>From 106bb2f7c208798a3af34c3ec72fbd65683c9293 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Anutosh Bhat <87052487+anutosh...@users.noreply.github.com>
https://github.com/llvmbot milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115848
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
