Revert to previous revision Diff 347356 and add empty module flag could be empty in test.

Good catch! LGTM.

address @luismarques's comments.

1. Handle an empty module flag.

So sorry I forgot to run the clang regresion tests before.

2. Add empty module flag test and combine all tests into one. It is simiar to compress.ll

I think this patch is similar to D73339 but it fixes obj file attribute, it is not going to fix different target feature in one complication unit problem.

clang or clang+llc your test with my patch the arch attribute is still rv64i2p0, does it break your use cases?

Rebase

update test to show asm has F instructions.

ping

I got the similar IR during LTO because the clang driver would not pass the -mattr option to lto code generator.

address Craig's comments, thanks!

addres https://reviews.llvm.org/D71387#2762120, compute a default ABI for comparison rather than report an error when missing -mabi

In D71387#2762120, @jrtc27 wrote:

In D71387#2762115, @khchen wrote:

In D71387#1820995, @efriedma wrote:

Okay. Please let me know if you want me to review anything.

Hi all,
We had encoded the target-abi into module now, but I feel it does not make sense to
support overwrite ABI option and datalayout in TargetMahcine/IR by target-abi module flag in IR.

So I think maybe passing the target-abi option by clang driver can make anything more simple, the only one limitation is users need to specific -mabi in below cases at the last command.

clang -target riscv64-unknown-elf a.c -flto -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64f -o a.o
clang -target riscv64-unknown-elf b.c -flto -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64f -o b.o
clang -target riscv64-unknown-elf a.o b.o -flto -march=rv64gc -o foo

We should treat a missing -mabi= as an implicit -mabi=whatever-the-default-is for consistency with non-LTO. So yes, if the default ABI differs from what you've compiled the .o's with, you should have to provide it. This is needed already _anyway_ for multilib toolchains to determine the right library search path, though there are cases currently when you can get away without providing it, at least with Clang.

1. address @jrtc27' comment
2. change report_fatal_error as errs() because report_fatal_error will ask users to submit a bug report, it does not make sense.
3. combine two error message as one.

In D71387#1820995, @efriedma wrote:

Okay. Please let me know if you want me to review anything.

Pass -target-abi option into LTO codegenerator base on D102582 patch.

Good catch, LGTM!

Good catch! LGTM!

Hi, I would like to add ilp32e ABI support in llvm
Is there anyone working on this?
It seem the one thing missed is ilp32e ABI should disallow D ISA extension.
Is there anything else?

LGTM. Thanks for improvement!

Thanks for clarification, LGTM.

Select the immediate during isel does make sense to me, but unfortunately there are some cases have a slower result.
Do you know is there any cases which have better instruction order and reduce register spilling when apply the new scheme?
I'm just afraid of the new one would be always generate the slower instruction order.

LGTM.

@thakis
https://reviews.llvm.org/D100611 had landed, could you check your bot to see the cycle time?

LGTM.

LGTM.

Is it okay to you? @kito-cheng @frasercrmck
This patch could fix https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49962, I hope this could be merged soon.

LGTM. Please remove the ASM check in upstream patches.

LGTM.

Look good to me.
BTW, we also need to update the document later.

I think you also need to handle PermuteOperands field?
PermuteOperands performs the order permutation for non-masked and masked intrinsics when the operand order is different to builtins.

Address the Craig's comments.

In D99741#2694435, @thakis wrote:

In D99741#2694369, @khchen wrote:

In D99741#2694344, @thakis wrote:

Was there any more progress on this? If not, let's revert for now to not permanently slow down tests by over 20%.

https://reviews.llvm.org/D100611
https://reviews.llvm.org/D100617

Great, let's wait and see for a few days to see if it lands, and if so how much that recovers then.

Do you mean revert https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/compare/a3bfddbb6a27...59d5b8c27b43?

Yes.

In D99741#2694344, @thakis wrote:

Was there any more progress on this? If not, let's revert for now to not permanently slow down tests by over 20%.

I think using this proxy header for testing seems good.

The fact that we're running the optimization pipeline in these tests might be to blame. Might also be that riscv_vector.h is currently about 71000 lines which probably isn't quick to parse.

Fix Indent.

address Jim's comment.

rebase

Good catch! LGTM.

address Craig's comment.

LGTM.

rebase.

rebase

rebase