@@ -359,6 +359,11 @@ UseCaptureInfo llvm::DetermineUseCaptureKind(const Use &U,
const Value *Base) {
case Instruction::AddrSpaceCast:
// The original value is not captured via this if the new value isn't.
return UseCaptureInfo::passthrough();
+ case Instruction::Ptr
https://github.com/DavidSpickett commented:
Agree with the changes overall but there are problems in the CI runs to deal
with. Unless they are because this is part of a stack of PRs?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152199
___
llvm-branch-com
https://github.com/DavidSpickett edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152199
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -13,50 +13,15 @@
# run only the relevant tests.
#
-set -ex
-set -o pipefail
+source ./utils.sh
-MONOREPO_ROOT="${MONOREPO_ROOT:="$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)"}"
-BUILD_DIR="${BUILD_DIR:=${MONOREPO_ROOT}/build}"
INSTALL_DIR="${BUILD_DIR}/install"
-rm -rf "${BUILD_DIR}
https://github.com/nikic approved this pull request.
LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139357
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -1482,6 +1482,20 @@ Constant *llvm::ConstantFoldCastOperand(unsigned Opcode,
Constant *C,
switch (Opcode) {
default:
llvm_unreachable("Missing case");
+ case Instruction::PtrToAddr:
+if (auto *GEP = dyn_cast(C)) {
+ // For now just handle the basic case of
@@ -731,6 +731,12 @@ class TargetTransformInfoImplBase {
return 0;
break;
}
+case Instruction::PtrToAddr: {
+ unsigned DstSize = Dst->getScalarSizeInBits();
+ if (DL.isLegalInteger(DstSize) && DstSize >=
DL.getAddressSizeInBits(Src))
---
@@ -12521,6 +12521,59 @@ Example:
%Y = ptrtoint ptr %P to i64; yields zero
extension on 32-bit architecture
%Z = ptrtoint <4 x ptr> %P to <4 x i64>; yields vector zero extension
for a vector of addresses on 32-bit architecture
+.. _i_ptrto
https://github.com/nikic edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139357
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -12521,6 +12521,59 @@ Example:
%Y = ptrtoint ptr %P to i64; yields zero
extension on 32-bit architecture
%Z = ptrtoint <4 x ptr> %P to <4 x i64>; yields vector zero extension
for a vector of addresses on 32-bit architecture
+.. _i_ptrto
@@ -3532,6 +3533,28 @@ void Verifier::visitFPToSIInst(FPToSIInst &I) {
visitInstruction(I);
}
+void Verifier::visitPtrToAddrInst(PtrToAddrInst &I) {
+ // Get the source and destination types
+ Type *SrcTy = I.getOperand(0)->getType();
+ Type *DestTy = I.getType();
+
+ Ch
@@ -3532,6 +3533,28 @@ void Verifier::visitFPToSIInst(FPToSIInst &I) {
visitInstruction(I);
}
+void Verifier::visitPtrToAddrInst(PtrToAddrInst &I) {
+ // Get the source and destination types
+ Type *SrcTy = I.getOperand(0)->getType();
+ Type *DestTy = I.getType();
+
+ Ch
nikic wrote:
Should also add an entry in
https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#constant-expressions.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139357
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.o
https://github.com/DavidSpickett approved this pull request.
Nice improvement, LGTM.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152198
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
@@ -12521,6 +12521,59 @@ Example:
%Y = ptrtoint ptr %P to i64; yields zero
extension on 32-bit architecture
%Z = ptrtoint <4 x ptr> %P to <4 x i64>; yields vector zero extension
for a vector of addresses on 32-bit architecture
+.. _i_ptrto
https://github.com/ojhunt created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152271
The codegen for the final class dynamic_cast optimization fails to consider
pointer authentication. This change resolves this be simply disabling the
optimization when pointer authentication enabled.
>From 01bf
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Oliver Hunt (ojhunt)
Changes
The codegen for the final class dynamic_cast optimization fails to consider
pointer authentication. This change resolves this be simply disabling the
optimization when pointer authentication enabled.
---
Full
https://github.com/bhandarkar-pranav commented:
Thanks for this PR, @skatrak. One nit and one clarifying question on my part.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150924
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https
https://github.com/bhandarkar-pranav edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150924
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
@@ -359,6 +359,11 @@ UseCaptureInfo llvm::DetermineUseCaptureKind(const Use &U,
const Value *Base) {
case Instruction::AddrSpaceCast:
// The original value is not captured via this if the new value isn't.
return UseCaptureInfo::passthrough();
+ case Instruction::Ptr
mizvekov wrote:
> @mizvekov do you have a macOS machine handy to test this on? Or do you want
> me to try?
I don't think there is anything macOS specific about this change.
My main development machine is macOS, and I always struggled with testing LLDB
on it.
But I finally setup a Linux VM on
https://github.com/cor3ntin milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152242
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
cor3ntin wrote:
@tru
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152242
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
Michael137 wrote:
> > @mizvekov do you have a macOS machine handy to test this on? Or do you want
> > me to try?
>
> I don't think there is anything macOS specific about this change.
>
> My main development machine is macOS, and I always struggled with testing
> LLDB on it.
>
> But I finally
@@ -1,10 +1,7 @@
-; RUN: opt %loadNPMPolly '-passes=print'
-polly-detect-track-failures -disable-output -pass-remarks-missed=polly-detect
< %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=REMARK
-; RUN: opt %loadNPMPolly '-passes=print'
-polly-detect-track-failures -disable-output -stats
https://github.com/DavidSpickett edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
___
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/skatrak updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150925
>From 8b344026f04bd417bb919c866b850d4474639d62 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sergio Afonso
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 16:47:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [OpenMP][OMPIRBuilder] Use device shared memory for arg
stru
https://github.com/skatrak updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150926
>From 6a81001ec131371c981e789f3dd402fb277e3c62 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sergio Afonso
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 16:32:03 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [OpenMP][OMPIRBuilder] Support parallel in Generic kernels
This
https://github.com/skatrak updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150927
>From a26b2a03629f3ea8a9852a77db49df73f15115f4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sergio Afonso
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2025 13:52:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] [OpenMPOpt] Make parallel regions reachable from new
DeviceRTL
@@ -1,10 +1,7 @@
-; RUN: opt %loadNPMPolly '-passes=print'
-polly-detect-track-failures -disable-output -pass-remarks-missed=polly-detect
< %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=REMARK
-; RUN: opt %loadNPMPolly '-passes=print'
-polly-detect-track-failures -disable-output -stats
https://github.com/DavidSpickett milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
DavidSpickett wrote:
The alternative is to bump 21 to 22 in the messages on the 21.x branch, and
turn them into errors on main instead.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llv
https://github.com/bhandarkar-pranav commented:
Overall, the approach makes sense to me. thank you for the PR. Only big concern
is @Meinersbur's comment on using a derived class of `CodeExtractor` instead of
callbacks. Having said that callbacks are all over the place in `OMPIRBuilder`.
https:
@@ -265,12 +264,18 @@ CodeExtractor::CodeExtractor(ArrayRef BBs,
DominatorTree *DT,
BranchProbabilityInfo *BPI, AssumptionCache *AC,
bool AllowVarArgs, bool AllowAlloca,
BasicBlock *Allocati
@@ -133,6 +137,25 @@ class CodeExtractorAnalysisCache {
// space.
bool ArgsInZeroAddressSpace;
+// If set, this callback will be used to allocate the arguments in the
+// caller before passing it to the outlined function holding the extracted
+// piece of c
@@ -268,6 +268,38 @@ computeOpenMPScheduleType(ScheduleKind ClauseKind, bool
HasChunks,
return Result;
}
+/// Given a function, if it represents the entry point of a target kernel, this
+/// returns the execution mode flags associated to that kernel.
bhanda
https://github.com/easyonaadit updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150170
>From 9c2af6a1fa466a15cbe3ffea4c5c46cd0f53c5c8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaditya
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2025 12:57:27 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] Add builtins for wave reduction intrinsics
---
clang/include/cla
https://github.com/easyonaadit updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150170
>From 9c2af6a1fa466a15cbe3ffea4c5c46cd0f53c5c8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaditya
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2025 12:57:27 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] Add builtins for wave reduction intrinsics
---
clang/include/cla
https://github.com/hekota updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152253
>From 3594a7af4e21daa461cb928fc1119bd09cc114e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Helena Kotas
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 22:27:42 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [DirectX] Fix resource binding analysis incorrectly
removing d
hekota wrote:
> This should be testable with a unit test in
> llvm/unittests/Fronted/HLSLBindingTest.cpp rather than via an assert in
> DXILPostOptimizationValidation
Good catch! I have added a test.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152253
https://github.com/easyonaadit updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150170
>From c4c194101d1262120bd0c2e7d5ad1694a2eeda64 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaditya
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2025 12:57:27 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] Add builtins for wave reduction intrinsics
---
clang/include/cla
https://github.com/easyonaadit updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150170
>From c4c194101d1262120bd0c2e7d5ad1694a2eeda64 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Aaditya
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2025 12:57:27 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] Add builtins for wave reduction intrinsics
---
clang/include/cla
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 HEAD~1 HEAD --extensions cpp --
llvm/lib/Target/AMDGPU/SIISelLowering.cpp
``
https://github.com/bhandarkar-pranav commented:
A thought that is not terribly urgent simply because my understanding is that
reverse offload is not terribly important right now. However, when we reverse
offload, we'll have to ensure that parallel threads on the CPU (host) now are
able to acce
bogner wrote:
This should be testable with a unit test in
llvm/unittests/Fronted/HLSLBindingTest.cpp rather than via an assert in
DXILPostOptimizationValidation
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152253
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llv
bogner wrote:
> This should be testable with a unit test in
> llvm/unittests/Fronted/HLSLBindingTest.cpp rather than via an assert in
> DXILPostOptimizationValidation
Something like this should catch it I think:
```c++
TEST(HLSLBindingTest, TestNoOverlapWithDuplicates) {
hlsl::BindingInfoBu
https://github.com/bogner approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152254
___
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/bhandarkar-pranav edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150925
___
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/matthias-springer updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151865
>From a94080b51e4554dee5c8f073d9647dc99d4dbc9a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matthias Springer
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2025 09:21:22 +
Subject: [PATCH] :WIP
update
erase immediately
update 2
fix
fi
mizvekov wrote:
That builds cleanly on a MacOS machine and the tests for that checker pass.
If you can still reproduce that even from a clean build, please share repro
steps.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149949
___
llvm-branch-commits ma
https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152199
___
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/joaosaffran edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146785
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
tru wrote:
Oh I missed it was in the release branch, I thought it would be on the main
branch right after release. Then I agree with Nikita, it shouldn't land in the
release branch right before the final RC.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
_
https://github.com/nikic requested changes to this pull request.
This is absolutely inappropriate to land on the release branch.
Feel free to update the version numbers -- or better, remove the mention of
specific versions entirely. These will get removed when we are ready to remove
them, not
https://github.com/llvmbot created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152364
Backport 2bb23d444767540c59c32ccdb86f7ef6e35fd96e
Requested by: @tstellar
>From 93d8fd4f2023e5114614d9b3f33e3b4a8618bbfd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Kruse
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 16:39:03 +0200
Subjec
https://github.com/rampitec created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152369
HW will emulate unsupported PCIe atomics via CAS loop, we do not need to
expand these anymore.
>From fa6bfc9e57d223e574c441b9d1027cd0b6f0494e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stanislav Mekhanoshin
Date: Wed, 6 A
rampitec wrote:
> [!WARNING]
> This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is
> open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack href="https://app.graphite.dev/github/pr/llvm/llvm-project/152369?utm_source=stack-comment-downstack-mergeability-warning"
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-backend-amdgpu
Author: Stanislav Mekhanoshin (rampitec)
Changes
HW will emulate unsupported PCIe atomics via CAS loop, we do not need to
expand these anymore.
---
Patch is 73.26 KiB, truncated to 20.00 KiB below, full version:
https://github.com/llvm/
https://github.com/rampitec ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152369
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
Michael137 wrote:
Clean build succeeded.
These tests fail on macOS:
```
Unresolved Tests (3):
lldb-api ::
commands/expression/import-std-module/list/TestListFromStdModule.py
lldb-api ::
commands/expression/import-std-module/non-module-type-separati
https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152199
___
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/dtcxzyw approved this pull request.
It may take several years to remove this pattern from downstream projects... So
I don't know when to reland this patch.
LGTM. But it should be folded into main. Then we can backport it to 21.x.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/1
@@ -1284,13 +1283,13 @@ bool StructurizeCFG::makeUniformRegion(Region *R,
UniformityInfo &UA) {
/// Run the transformation for each region found
bool StructurizeCFG::run(Region *R, DominatorTree *DT) {
- if (R->isTopLevelRegion())
+ // CallBr and its corresponding blocks mu
https://github.com/Michael137 approved this pull request.
Thanks for ensuring we don't lose the scope in our typenames! LGTM
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149949
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https:
https://github.com/ro-i updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133907
>From ba9e6db89ecfdf4cc4960f3a33ddc00dcb0250c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Robert Imschweiler
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 08:03:16 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [IR] Add CallBr intrinsics support
This commit adds support
@@ -3006,10 +3024,41 @@ bool IRTranslator::translateInvoke(const User &U,
return true;
}
+/// The intrinsics currently supported by callbr are implicit control flow
+/// intrinsics such as amdgcn.kill.
bool IRTranslator::translateCallBr(const User &U,
mizvekov wrote:
> > > @mizvekov do you have a macOS machine handy to test this on? Or do you
> > > want me to try?
>
> >
>
> > I don't think there is anything macOS specific about this change.
>
> >
>
> > My main development machine is macOS, and I always struggled with testing
> > LLDB o
https://github.com/joaosaffran updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147573
>From 01a558be2b36a6bb00e1027c4d042c7bacd4ed5a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: joaosaffran
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 19:26:24 +
Subject: [PATCH 01/13] add validation
---
.../DXILPostOptimizationValidation.c
https://github.com/joaosaffran updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/147573
>From 01a558be2b36a6bb00e1027c4d042c7bacd4ed5a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: joaosaffran
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 19:26:24 +
Subject: [PATCH 01/12] add validation
---
.../DXILPostOptimizationValidation.c
theotherjimmy wrote:
I would approve if I could. :+1:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149949
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
phoebewang wrote:
Fix incorrect arguments order of _mm*_maskz_dpw[su,us,uu]d[s]_epi32.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151092
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listi
Michael137 wrote:
@mizvekov do you have a macOS machine handy to test this on? Or do you want me
to try?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149949
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cg
https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152199
___
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/DavidSpickett approved this pull request.
LGTM.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152199
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-comm
@@ -3490,19 +3514,25 @@ void SelectionDAGBuilder::visitCallBr(const CallBrInst
&I) {
// Update successor info.
addSuccessorWithProb(CallBrMBB, Return, BranchProbability::getOne());
- for (unsigned i = 0, e = I.getNumIndirectDests(); i < e; ++i) {
-BasicBlock *Dest =
Michael137 wrote:
Hmmm getting this error when building the patch series locally
```
Undefined symbols for architecture arm64:
"clang::NestedNameSpecifierLoc::getTypeLoc() const", referenced from:
clang::RecursiveASTVisitor<(anonymous
namespace)::RetainPtrCtorAdoptChecker::checkASTDecl(c
mizvekov wrote:
> Hmmm getting this error when building the patch series locally
>
> ```
> Undefined symbols for architecture arm64:
> "clang::NestedNameSpecifierLoc::getTypeLoc() const", referenced from:
> clang::RecursiveASTVisitor<(anonymous
> namespace)::RetainPtrCtorAdoptChecker::c
llvmbot wrote:
@nikic What do you think about merging this PR to the release branch?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152364
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
https://github.com/llvmbot milestoned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152364
___
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/nikic approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152364
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
ssahasra wrote:
A couple of comments about the commit description. These also apply to #149308.
1. Can we remove the pass names added as tags? They don't actually add any new
information to the commit headline.
2. What does "basic" support signify? What is pending before we can call it
"complet
DavidSpickett wrote:
> but I think we should make sure there is a release note for this as well
Done, and updated the cmake docs page.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm
https://github.com/DavidSpickett updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
>From afc78ab30f7ec81b7163fb4c3928cb08bd902766 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Spickett
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 12:35:05 +
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [llvm][cmake] Turn runtime in PROJECTS warnings into
https://github.com/tru approved this pull request.
LGTM, but I think we should make sure there is a release note for this as well,
since I expect it to break some peoples build configurations.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
___
llvm-
jhuber6 wrote:
@frasercrmck Did we get `libclc` fully working from the runtimes configuration?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailm
https://github.com/tblah approved this pull request.
LGTM, thanks
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152007
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commi
https://github.com/hubert-reinterpretcast ready_for_review
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152242
___
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/jthackray updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/146329
>From e326a4f37f608c0e1a26d1a72a58ae96c9481708 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jonathan Thackray
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 21:22:43 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [AArch64][llvm] Unify AArch64 tests into a single file
@@ -1102,12 +1102,64 @@ struct DeferredStore {
};
} // namespace
+/// Check whether allocations for the given operation might potentially have to
+/// be done in device shared memory. That means we're compiling for a
offloading
+/// target, the operation is an `omp::TargetOp`
@@ -1102,12 +1102,64 @@ struct DeferredStore {
};
} // namespace
+/// Check whether allocations for the given operation might potentially have to
+/// be done in device shared memory. That means we're compiling for a
offloading
+/// target, the operation is an `omp::TargetOp`
https://github.com/DavidSpickett created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152302
As promised by the current warning message:
CMake Warning at CMakeLists.txt:209 (message):
Using LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=openmp is deprecated now, and will become a
fatal error in the LLVM 21 release. Ple
https://github.com/ro-i edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152161
___
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/ro-i edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152161
___
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/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152198
___
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/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152198
___
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/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152199
___
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/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152198
___
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/boomanaiden154 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/152198
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
ro-i wrote:
> 1. Can we remove the pass names added as tags? They don't actually add any
> new information to the commit headline.
I think they do. I developed and submitted the PR to support inline-asm for
amdgpu as two PRs so that it's not too large and easier to review. So, if I
would call
nikic wrote:
I think it would be a good idea to land the refactorings here (which just split
things into separate methods) as a separate NFC change. It's kind of hard to
follow what's going on here with all the code movements mixed in.
https://github.com/llvm
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
