User Details
- User Since
- Mar 10 2016, 1:50 PM (329 w, 18 h)
Yesterday
Yikes! Thanks for the revert. I didn't see the email from the bot until just about 2 minutes before you reverted. I'll see if I can reproduce.
Wed, Jun 29
Msan complains about this patch https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/74/builds/11664/steps/17/logs/stdio
I will commit/revert it myself.
Tue, Jun 28
Do we need a test for llvm-link?
Mon, Jun 27
restore blank line
exactly as reverted revision
886715af962de2c92fac4bd37104450345711e4a + 572b08790a69f955ae0cbb1b4a7d4a215f15dad9
Reverted with cdfa15da94f06289dcf86173d18b6627f92ac403 (inlcuding 572b08790a69f955ae0cbb1b4a7d4a215f15dad9)
This bot is broken by this patch
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/85/builds/8881
Fri, Jun 24
Maybe then just keep as is to avoid new preprocessor branches?
The rest is LGTM
Wed, Jun 22
Could you please move refactoring (like extraction emitPrologue) into a separate CL?
Tue, Jun 21
Fri, Jun 17
Wed, Jun 15
Fri, Jun 10
Wed, Jun 8
Thanks for the fix!
maybe #define _GNU_SOURCE as in documentation?
I believe "Depends on" should be in the summary, no in the title
No need to recover my snapshot, I'll just comment here.
Tue, Jun 7
Up to you if you, if you want to wait for Peter. Feel free to remove and land it if you think it's done.
I added blocker only to make sure that review is shown to @phosek on Phabricator main page.
Why do we want this as a separate -fsanitize=
Maybe better to have some modifier flag like -fsanitize-memtag-globals=1 ?
I simplified this a little bit, but I guess this is effectively the same.
rebase
fix rebase
rebase
Mon, Jun 6
yes, however I have no idea if we need !TC.getTriple().isOSFreeBSD() !TC.getTriple().isOSNetBSD() !TC.getTriple().isOSOpenBSD()) etc.
I guess if make mistake it will be noticed and fixed.
Thanks.
LGTM with few nits
Fri, Jun 3
LGTM, with Asm test and bitcode stuff moved as explained.