- User Since
- Dec 4 2013, 8:33 AM (373 w, 17 h)
Fri, Jan 22
Thu, Jan 21
Dec 22 2020
Fix clang-tidy warnings.
Dec 18 2020
Nov 16 2020
Nov 14 2020
Nov 13 2020
Update the wording of a comment.
Nov 11 2020
Use the function argument index instead of the function argument in
coro.id.async. This solves any spurious use issues.
Transfer the debug location from the suspend point to the functions called at and after the suspend point (context projection).
Yes, frontend is expected to emit a thunk that models the tail call to the function at the suspend point. This prevents code moving in between the tail call and return before coroutine splitting and allows for specifying how to perform the call (e.g pointer authentication).
Nov 10 2020
Also inline the context project function used by the resume function.
I am worried about introducing unnecessary thunks that the debugger has to step through.
Semantically, it is not needed. But without inlining here this helper dispatch function thunk will remain at O0 because inlining is not run again.
Nov 9 2020
Nov 6 2020
Hmm, those failures also occur on other PRs. I guess we don't keep this bot clean.
Nov 5 2020
No change. Retrigger tests.
Retry with clang-format. test/Other/new-pass-manager.ll passes locally
One more lint clang-tidy fix.
Fix a comment to reflect that the async context argument position is now parameterizable
Change the async function pointer's context size position
Fix Lint errors
Nov 4 2020
Nov 2 2020
Fix more lint errors
Address comments and lint formatting errors
Aug 31 2020
Aug 21 2020
Respect atomic padding.
Aug 19 2020
Try to sooth clang-tidy
Jul 14 2020
Jun 15 2020
Jun 3 2020
More clang-tidy soothing. I wish I would see its output ...
Jun 2 2020
Attempt to sooth clang-tidy
Address review comments.
Apr 1 2020
- Implement for the GNU runtimes
Mar 31 2020
- Remove callback. Swift can inspect the generated IR and update it.
Mar 30 2020
- Change API name to emitObjCProtocolObject.
- Make stuff compile on current ToT.
Can you explain the need for the callback? Are you expecting to use this for Swift-declared protocols by synthesizing an ObjC protocol declaration for them? I can see why you'd need a callback in that case.
Dec 17 2018
May 17 2018
Aug 30 2017
Jul 25 2017
The change looks good but can you add a test case to test/CodeGen/ARM/swifterror.ll that r8 is not spilled say for a target triple of 'armv7-linux-androideabi'. For example, the function params_and_return_in_reg should not spill r8 as part of CSR spilling.
Jun 21 2017
Same patch bug with added diff context.
Based on email conversation with John. He pointed out we purposely don't want to use the allocation size for the algorithm and that we can just use LLVM's layout when we compute the coercion types.
May 20 2016
Apr 14 2016
I don't see a reasonable way to write a unit test without either creating a stub IR or making the typedef typename Traits::PhiItT public and then just testing the presence.
Nov 21 2015
This might penalize programs that don't traffic in denormals (most programs as I understand it). Did you measure the performance impact?
Nov 1 2015
Sep 29 2015
Aug 18 2015
This make sense to me.
Jul 16 2015
I think this change is orthogonal to improving SCEV for cases where we can prove no wrapping by looking at the IR. At the high level this change looks good to me (I have always wanted to have the ability for SCEV to gather assumptions needed to prove no wrapping) - and the examples demonstrate that there is a need. Silviu has addressed the issue of only generating the checks when needed.
May 22 2015
I share Simon's concerns. Please make sure that we still get a good estimate for kernels like (these are from the rdar mentioned in the commit).
May 13 2015
This LGTM. Nice work!