Fix review notes in the test

Test failures looks unrelated, can someone take a look at the patch, maybe @ldionne ?
Thanks in advance!

Fix test for 32-bit (check SIZE_WIDTH)

Update commit message

@azat if such a pthread_mutex_lock using program does not need to work with tsan, we can keep simple and use #if SANITIZER_GLIBC\n#if !GLIBC_PREREQ(2, 34) instead.

Closed in favor of D140957

Can someone elaborate, does my changes breaks CI? Does not looks like this is so.

Optional: End full sentences with a period. Some directories use the convention that non-RUN-non-CHECK lines use /// as the comment marker. The idea is to make comments stand out and foster possible future lit/FileCheck improvement that check unused prefixes.

Update comment in the test

Rerun CI

Apparently test failures are not related?

Update the test

Can someone make a final review please? Thanks in advance.

If the two patches are basically identical with just some fixes for the problem, the convention is to reuse the original Differential.

Resubmit with fixed tests and using --plugin-opt

Closing in favor of https://reviews.llvm.org/D133092

If the two patches are basically identical with just some fixes for the problem, the convention is to reuse the original Differential.

Which patch needs review, this one or D133875? Or are they both relevant?

Can someone do a final review on this? And apply it if everything is OK.

Update the test

Fix clang-format and tiny test refactoring

The message is outdated now.

Test cleanup

Add a real check of .debug_aranges in the test

Use --plugin-opt=-generate-arange-section instead.

I wasn't expecting that

This is not correct. GNU ld and gold don't accept -mllvm. You need to use -plugin-opt=-generate...

I think @MaskRay was saying this doesn't actually work & different flags are needed to pass to lld

Closed in favor of https://reviews.llvm.org/D133875

Perhaps lld[^"]*" would be better?

Presumably this would break if someone's build uses a tool suffix (so lld becomes lld-tot or something like that)? Perhaps lld[^"]*" would be better?

@thakis Thanks for taking a look!

the test crashes with sanitizers https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/5/builds/27437

Can someone pick this please?

Can you please fix this?

Still not enough, requires one more patch - https://reviews.llvm.org/D133847. Sigh.

In D133092#3788734, @kaz7 wrote:

For your information, after this patch check-clang fails with following errors if there is no lld (lld is not enable in CMake, and lld is not installed previously). I appreciate if you run debug-options.c test with -fuse-ld=lld if the lld is existing. Thanks.

~sort of. The process is described here: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#obtaining-commit-access

Hm, by some reason on CI there is lld, any clue? (I've looked through other tests, and cannot find anything different that will show path to lld or require it explicitly)

the usual flow would be once you have approval to go ahead and submit the patch yourself - I take it you don't have commit access?

Is there anything left here?

Update comment

Update comment

@dblaikie Rebased. Brief of you comment had been added into the code, and the whole comment included into the commit message. Thanks for taking a look!

Adjust comments as suggested by @dblaikie

PS4CPU.cpp actually does have a case where we pass "-mllvm -enable-jmc-instrument" to lld, so you are not breaking new ground here.

Update test and comments in the code (suggestions from @probinson)

Can someone take a look please?

Adjust the test (to fix build on windows)

v3: test only linux (to avoid failures on windows)
v4: add a comment about SCE

@Orlando thanks for taking a look!

Add test

Is it possible that this change just broke the lldb data formatter for string?

And I just applied your original patch locally on my arm64 macbook air, ran the macOS 11 backdeployment testing, and I can see numerous tests failing because strings have an incorrect length. So this issue would have been caught with macOS arm64 backdeployment CI.

Rebase on top of main

ldionne should I resubmit the patch to run CI against https://reviews.llvm.org/D123081?

Use unsigned char for __padding (as noted by @ldionne)

@ldionne @philnik can you please take a look? Thanks in advance.

v2: avoid ABI breakage (thanks to tests and @ldionne)

In D116176#3207552, @vitalybuka wrote:

Thanks, I am going to land it for you.

v3: fix typo and add a comment in test

v2: fix mode for real setbuffer()

Run clang-format (via git clang-format instead of arc --lint, since later is not complete)

Run clang-format

Please clang-format

Update patch after github email was verified

In D93316#2458806, @ldionne wrote:

TBH, I don't know. It's the first time I see this. If you give me your Author Name <email@domain>, I can commit this for you.

In D93316#2456101, @ldionne wrote:

@azat What version of GCC are you using?