- User Since
- Jun 23 2020, 7:14 AM (22 w, 10 h)
Wed, Nov 11
This looks like two separate patches to me.
Tue, Nov 3
Mon, Nov 2
This pattern isn't needed I don't think
Thu, Oct 29
I appreciate that the history and context for this has been a bit obscured. Most of it can be gathered on the patch D83667
I think a MIR test would be better here.
Mon, Oct 26
Looks nice to me. Is it worth adding mul (sext_inreg, sext i32) patterns too in case one operand is sext and the other is being masked? mul is commutative so I think it would only be two extra patterns, one for sext and one for zext.
Oct 22 2020
Oct 21 2020
Rebased atop changes to https://reviews.llvm.org/D88494
Oct 19 2020
I'm a little concerned IfConversion isn't really prepared to deal with the distinction here: in some cases, if conversion doesn't predicate all the instructions in the if-converted block.
Oct 12 2020
Do we really need the boolean to default to false? There are only two callers, as far as I can tell.
Sep 29 2020
Aug 14 2020
Looks like we've lost access to https://crbug.com/1114852, so can't access the build repro. Is this something you can sort out for us?
Aug 13 2020
Hi @akhuang, thanks for bringing this up.
Aug 10 2020
LGTM, if no one else has any issues.
Source changes look good to me, just a few test-related points to address.
Aug 3 2020
Addressed comments, and rebased to include D84653 (Which handles the IT-block instruction legality)
Jul 13 2020
Jul 2 2020
Jul 1 2020
Updates some comments. NFC when compared to prior diffs
Jun 26 2020
Addressing inline comments
Jun 24 2020
Reworded/improved summary, and included full patch context