It indeed does! Thanks!
Jul 23 2018
Jul 10 2018
Jul 5 2018
Update to current master and consolidate tests
Apr 19 2018
From my side this looks good and it fixes my more complicated test-case in Julia as well.
Superseded by https://reviews.llvm.org/D45819
Apr 4 2018
Apr 3 2018
@nemanjai correctly noted that the both branches are equal and we can simplify this,
by making sure that we don't fall over the iterator and then removing both BB.
Mar 25 2018
Mar 20 2018
Is the x86_64-pc-windows-itanium the right platform triple?
- update for windows-itanium and add tests
Sorry about that - I tested it with a build tree that was a couple weeks old. For some reason I got that failure there, but it does indeed seem to work with the latest trunk version. No idea what changed inbetween.
Mar 19 2018
Hm I can't reproduce the failure you are seeing. I added your example as a test case and started extending the tests in Codegen/X86/stack-protector.ll to also cover mingw (there still lots of cases to go there).
Start adding test for ssp and sspstrong for mingw32
Thanks! Can you land this for me I don't have the commit bit.
update tests to use FileCheck
@nemanjai I added two test cases the first taken from ARM.addrspacecast.ll and the second from a bug that the Julia frontend hit.
add tests for addrspaces noops on PPC
Mar 17 2018
@mstorsjo Thanks for your feedback. Might I ask how you tested this? Did you simply compiled clang as well and run the testsuite?
Rebase onto master
In the progress of updating the Julia frontend to LLVM 6.0.0 I encountered this issue again.
Julia is using mingw for our windows support and as far as I understand mingw doesn't provide __security_cookie and __security_check_cookie
as part of the runtime (https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/mailman/message/27235169/). I suspect partly due to the fact that the version of
msvcrt.dll that mingw only has the symbols in an external static library (bufferoverflowU.lib). On the other hand mingw does provide libssp.
Feb 26 2018
Jul 6 2017
@echristo I noticed that you reverted r294702 shortly after it landed. What needs to be done to get it working?
Feb 13 2017
Jan 4 2017
address review comments
SKX: Defensively check for AVX512
@craig.topper should we still have a feature gate for 0x55? SKX is not on the market yet so we can't verify this yet.
Add model id 0x55 as SKX and consolidate 0x4e & 0x5e into SKL
Jan 3 2017
Related issue for clang https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27003 shows that the model id for i5-6200U is also 4e. I also grouped the two Skylake ids together.
groups the model id for skylake and checks for AVX512 to differentiate between SKL and SKX
Jan 2 2017
Dec 11 2016
Dec 9 2016
btw, would it work with icl.exe on windows?
As far as I know Intel on Windows is capable off handling gnu-style options, but I don't have a test system.
Dec 1 2016
I should also note the mingw64 provides "libssp" so the MSVCRT functions are not needed on this target.
The Julia project is currently evaluating updating LLVM from 3.7 to 3.9 and we are working on making sure that it will continue to work on all supported platforms.
We currently support Windows through Mingw and encountered LLVM ERROR: Program used external function '__atomic_store' which could not be resolved! in JIT'ed code.
So far we did not need MSVCRT as a runtime library with Mingw, greatly simplifying deployment.
Oct 31 2016
Since I am new to LLVM I was wondering what the process of landing this is?
Oct 23 2016
Address review comments
Oct 21 2016
Sep 27 2016
Sep 22 2016
Sep 20 2016
@jpienaar Since I don't have commit access, I think somebody else needs to commit this.
Fix spelling in comment
You don't own revision D9168: "[NVPTX] Check if callsite is defined when computing argument allignment". Normally, you should only update revisions you own. You can "Commandeer" this revision from the web interface if you want to become the owner.
addresses review comments.
This is my first contribution to llvm so please let me know if I did something wrong in the process
Rebases the original changes and adds a test-case
Sep 19 2016
@jpienaar are you planning to work on this again? Or should I give it a go?
I have a potential test-case for this, but the patch doesn't apply cleanly to master so I was unable to test if this solves the problem.