Page MenuHomePhabricator

HLJ2009 (Li Jia He)
User

Projects

User does not belong to any projects.

User Details

User Since
May 7 2018, 6:31 AM (58 w, 2 d)

Recent Activity

Apr 2 2019

HLJ2009 added inline comments to D58712: Changes for Installing SwiftPM for Apple Swift 5 Toolchain on PowerPC64LE.
Apr 2 2019, 6:56 AM · Restricted Project

Feb 25 2019

HLJ2009 added a comment to D58614: Fixed a typo in the test s/CEHCK/CHECK/.

LGTM. Thanks for catching this, I am surprised that those typos slipped through ... FYI. @HLJ2009

Feb 25 2019, 4:58 PM · Restricted Project

Nov 27 2018

HLJ2009 updated the diff for D54825: [PowerPC] Fix a conversion is not considered when the ISD::BR_CC node making the instruction selection.

Using the suggestion to modify the code. Thanks to Steven and Nemanjai.

Nov 27 2018, 5:50 PM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D54824: [PowerPC] [NFC] Add test cases to the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection.

Using the suggestion to update the test cases. Thanks to Steven and Nemanjai.

Nov 27 2018, 12:44 AM

Nov 26 2018

HLJ2009 updated the diff for D54825: [PowerPC] Fix a conversion is not considered when the ISD::BR_CC node making the instruction selection.

Test cases have been modified to make code changes

Nov 26 2018, 7:02 PM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D54824: [PowerPC] [NFC] Add test cases to the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection.
Nov 26 2018, 7:00 PM

Nov 21 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D54824: [PowerPC] [NFC] Add test cases to the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection.

@steven.zhang Thanks for pointing this out, i will consider it.

Nov 21 2018, 11:51 PM
HLJ2009 added a child revision for D54824: [PowerPC] [NFC] Add test cases to the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection: D54825: [PowerPC] Fix a conversion is not considered when the ISD::BR_CC node making the instruction selection.
Nov 21 2018, 9:32 PM
HLJ2009 added a parent revision for D54825: [PowerPC] Fix a conversion is not considered when the ISD::BR_CC node making the instruction selection: D54824: [PowerPC] [NFC] Add test cases to the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection.
Nov 21 2018, 9:32 PM
HLJ2009 updated subscribers of D54825: [PowerPC] Fix a conversion is not considered when the ISD::BR_CC node making the instruction selection.
Nov 21 2018, 9:31 PM
HLJ2009 created D54825: [PowerPC] Fix a conversion is not considered when the ISD::BR_CC node making the instruction selection.
Nov 21 2018, 9:30 PM
HLJ2009 created D54824: [PowerPC] [NFC] Add test cases to the ISD::BR_CC node in the instruction selection.
Nov 21 2018, 9:11 PM

Oct 25 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D53265: [PowerPC] Support constraint 'wi' in asm.

gentle pinging

Oct 25 2018, 12:15 AM

Oct 22 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.

Other than the minor nit, LGTM.

Oct 22 2018, 5:04 AM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 22 2018, 5:04 AM

Oct 17 2018

HLJ2009 updated the summary of D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:57 AM
HLJ2009 updated the summary of D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:57 AM
HLJ2009 updated the summary of D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:57 AM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:22 AM
HLJ2009 added a child revision for D53358: [PowerPC][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC: D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:17 AM
HLJ2009 added a parent revision for D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC: D53358: [PowerPC][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:17 AM
HLJ2009 updated the summary of D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:17 AM
HLJ2009 created D53360: [PowerPC] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:16 AM
HLJ2009 created D53358: [PowerPC][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in combineSetCC.
Oct 17 2018, 2:09 AM

Oct 14 2018

HLJ2009 created D53265: [PowerPC] Support constraint 'wi' in asm.
Oct 14 2018, 8:24 PM

Sep 7 2018

HLJ2009 updated subscribers of D51403: [PowerPC] Combine ADD to ADDZE.

Hi Steven @steven.zhang. I don't have the commit access. Could you help to commit the change for me? Thanks.

Sep 7 2018, 12:13 AM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D51403: [PowerPC] Combine ADD to ADDZE.

Limit optimization platforms to ppc64 and ppc64le

Sep 7 2018, 12:01 AM

Sep 2 2018

HLJ2009 updated the diff for D51403: [PowerPC] Combine ADD to ADDZE.

Modify comments using nemanjai's suggestion

Sep 2 2018, 8:16 PM

Aug 29 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D51403: [PowerPC] Combine ADD to ADDZE.

Does this code pattern frequently happen?

This code does not necessarily be executed frequently, but I think this is also a point that can be optimized.

Aug 29 2018, 2:29 AM
HLJ2009 created D51403: [PowerPC] Combine ADD to ADDZE.
Aug 29 2018, 12:32 AM
HLJ2009 updated the summary of D51403: [PowerPC] Combine ADD to ADDZE.
Aug 29 2018, 12:32 AM

Jun 18 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

Do you have commit privileges?

Jun 18 2018, 5:39 PM

Jun 15 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

LGTM too. Thanks for finding the bug and working through the steps to make good patches.

Jun 15 2018, 6:42 PM
HLJ2009 added a comment to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

Ok, thanks, that is much better.
Alive agrees that these are valid transforms.
I would personally prefer to also have some *negative* tests.
But this looks good to me. Unless others have any comments.

Jun 15 2018, 12:21 AM

Jun 14 2018

HLJ2009 updated the diff for D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

use utils/update_test_checks.py to get the difference file we want and set the test baseline. @lebedev.ri would you like to see if I was doing it right? Thanks very much.

Jun 14 2018, 8:30 PM

Jun 13 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

And now,

$ cd llvm
$ git checkout master # the svn trunk
$ arc patch D47922 
$ # unstage the test/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/AndOrXor.ll from last commit, delete that leftover file.
$ git rebase arcpatch-D48000 arcpatch-D47922
$ cd ../llvm-build/ # or whereever
$ ninja
$ ../llvm/utils/utils/update_test_checks.py --opt-binary ./bin/opt ../llvm/test/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/AndOrXor.ll
$ git commit --amend
$ git diff -p -U99999 arcpatch-D48000..arcpatch-D48000 > /tmp/patch.patch # i.e. from D48000 (!!! *not* svn trunk/git master) to this patch
$ # Update this differential with that patch.

hi ,

when I use git rebase arcpatch-D48000 arcpatch-D47922 command, I found this error fatal: Needed a single revision ,invalid upstream arcpatch-D48000
Do I have such permission to do such a thing?

You obviously need to do that in the very same repo clone where you did https://reviews.llvm.org/D48000#1130858
I would really suggest reading something about git, the workflow, basic commands..

Jun 13 2018, 6:40 AM
HLJ2009 added a comment to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

And now,

$ cd llvm
$ git checkout master # the svn trunk
$ arc patch D47922 
$ # unstage the test/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/AndOrXor.ll from last commit, delete that leftover file.
$ git rebase arcpatch-D48000 arcpatch-D47922
$ cd ../llvm-build/ # or whereever
$ ninja
$ ../llvm/utils/utils/update_test_checks.py --opt-binary ./bin/opt ../llvm/test/test/Transforms/InstSimplify/AndOrXor.ll
$ git commit --amend
$ git diff -p -U99999 arcpatch-D48000..arcpatch-D48000 > /tmp/patch.patch # i.e. from D48000 (!!! *not* svn trunk/git master) to this patch
$ # Update this differential with that patch.
Jun 13 2018, 6:33 AM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

use utils/update_test_checks.py to get the difference file we want and set the test baseline.

Jun 13 2018, 5:47 AM
HLJ2009 added a comment to D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

I think we've sorted out the problem in D47922, but this patch is not correct as shown.

It should show the results (the missed optimization) that we currently get using trunk. Please update.

Can you help me look at my submission? I use the trunk branch code.

In this patch, you want to add new tests to trunk (the code change from D47922 should not exist).

Run utils/update_test_checks.py with these new tests. There should be at least one missed optimization in the CHECK lines (because D47922 is not applied).

Yes, I want to do this. When this test file is accepted, I update D47922 again. Can I see the corresponding improvement ?

I don't understand. Are you unable to update this patch on Phabricator with the current CHECK lines?

sorroy, I know how to submit change to phabricator, but I don't know how to use utils/update_test_checks.py to get the difference file we want and set the test baseline. I made some attempts but it seems to be incorrect.

Jun 13 2018, 4:19 AM

Jun 12 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

I think we've sorted out the problem in D47922, but this patch is not correct as shown.

It should show the results (the missed optimization) that we currently get using trunk. Please update.

Can you help me look at my submission? I use the trunk branch code.

In this patch, you want to add new tests to trunk (the code change from D47922 should not exist).

Run utils/update_test_checks.py with these new tests. There should be at least one missed optimization in the CHECK lines (because D47922 is not applied).

Jun 12 2018, 8:21 AM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

submit code based on trunk branch

Jun 12 2018, 1:22 AM

Jun 11 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

I think we've sorted out the problem in D47922, but this patch is not correct as shown.

It should show the results (the missed optimization) that we currently get using trunk. Please update.

Jun 11 2018, 6:58 PM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

submit code based on trunk branch.

Jun 11 2018, 6:55 PM
HLJ2009 abandoned D47972: update simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck function's test case..
Jun 11 2018, 12:09 AM
HLJ2009 added inline comments to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 11 2018, 12:05 AM

Jun 10 2018

HLJ2009 updated the summary of D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 10 2018, 11:58 PM
HLJ2009 created D48000: [InstSimplify][NFC] Add tests for some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 10 2018, 11:55 PM

Jun 8 2018

HLJ2009 updated the diff for D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

Move the test file to D47972 for submission

Jun 8 2018, 10:12 PM
HLJ2009 updated the summary of D47972: update simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck function's test case..
Jun 8 2018, 7:15 PM
HLJ2009 created D47972: update simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck function's test case..
Jun 8 2018, 7:04 PM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

update simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck function's test cases

Jun 8 2018, 8:03 AM
HLJ2009 added a comment to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

Re: test location
This transform is in InstSimplify, so it should have tests under test/Transforms/InstSimplify. Ie, we shouldn't need to run -instcombine to demonstrate the fold.
Have a look in Transforms/InstSimplify/AndOrXor.ll for existing tests. You may want to do some preliminary cleanup if the tests are scattered between InstCombine and InstSimplify.

Jun 8 2018, 7:18 AM
HLJ2009 added inline comments to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 8 2018, 2:54 AM
HLJ2009 added inline comments to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 8 2018, 2:27 AM
HLJ2009 added inline comments to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 8 2018, 1:47 AM
HLJ2009 added inline comments to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 8 2018, 1:44 AM
HLJ2009 updated the diff for D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().

modify the test file.

Jun 8 2018, 1:27 AM

Jun 7 2018

HLJ2009 added inline comments to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 7 2018, 11:58 PM
HLJ2009 added inline comments to D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 7 2018, 11:51 PM
HLJ2009 retitled D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck() from x > y && x != 0 should fold to x > y to unsigned foo(unsigned x, unsigned y) { return x > y && x != 0; } should fold to x > y.
Jun 7 2018, 7:22 PM
HLJ2009 retitled D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck() from x > y && x != 0 -> x > y to x > y && x != 0 should fold to x > y.
Jun 7 2018, 7:17 PM
HLJ2009 created D47922: [InstSimplify] Fix some missed optimization opportunities in simplifyUnsignedRangeCheck().
Jun 7 2018, 6:59 PM

Jun 3 2018

HLJ2009 updated the diff for D46805: If some platforms do not support an attribute, we should exclude the platform.

update test case.

Jun 3 2018, 7:06 PM

Jun 2 2018

HLJ2009 added a comment to D46805: If some platforms do not support an attribute, we should exclude the platform.

@rsmith -- do the object file formats listed look correct to you?

They look at least plausible. We should be able to test whether LLVM can actually emit aliases on each of these targets easily enough...

However, I get this error for any WAsm compilation I try:

fatal error: error in backend: section size does not fit in a uint32_t

... so I have no idea if aliases are/will be supported there. Perhaps @sunfish can tell us :)

Yes, they are intended to be supported. It sounds like you found a bug, though I've not been able to reproduce it in simple tests.

Jun 2 2018, 1:11 AM

May 21 2018

HLJ2009 updated the diff for D46805: If some platforms do not support an attribute, we should exclude the platform.

listing the object formats that *do* support aliases seems reasonable

May 21 2018, 5:43 AM

May 14 2018

HLJ2009 added inline comments to D46805: If some platforms do not support an attribute, we should exclude the platform.
May 14 2018, 7:57 AM
HLJ2009 added inline comments to D46805: If some platforms do not support an attribute, we should exclude the platform.
May 14 2018, 5:29 AM

May 13 2018

HLJ2009 created D46805: If some platforms do not support an attribute, we should exclude the platform.
May 13 2018, 7:25 AM