We randomly use outs() or errs(), which makes test logs confusing.
We also randomly add/don't add a line afterward.
Reviewed By: arsenm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D136130
This reverts commit 3988bd1398.
Did not build on this bot:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot#builders/215/builds/6372
/usr/include/c++/9/bits/predefined_ops.h:177:11: error: no match for call to
‘(llvm::less_first) (std::pair<long unsigned int, llvm::bolt::BinaryBasicBlock*>&, const std::pair<long unsigned int, std::nullptr_t>&)’
177 | { return bool(_M_comp(*__it, __val)); }
One could reuse this functor instead of rolling out your own version.
There were a couple other cases where the code was similar, but not
quite the same, such as it might have an assertion in the lambda or other
constructs. Thus, I've not touched any of those, as it might change the
behavior in some way.
As per https://discourse.llvm.org/t/submitting-simple-nfc-patches/62640/3?u=steakhal
Chris Lattner
> LLVM intentionally has a “yes, you can apply common sense judgement to
> things” policy when it comes to code review. If you are doing mechanical
> patches (e.g. adopting less_first) that apply to the entire monorepo,
> then you don’t need everyone in the monorepo to sign off on it. Having
> some +1 validation from someone is useful, but you don’t need everyone
> whose code you touch to weigh in.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D126068
Having a separate counting method runs the risk of a mismatch between
the actual reduction method and the counting method.
Instead, create an Oracle that always returns true for shouldKeep(), run
the reduction, and count how many times shouldKeep() was called. The
module should not be modified if shouldKeep() always returns true.
Reviewed By: Meinersbur
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113537
Use Module& wherever possible.
Since every reduction immediately turns Chunks into an Oracle, directly pass Oracle instead.
Reviewed By: hans
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111122
We expose the fact that we rely on unsigned wrapping to iterate through
all indexes. This can be confusing. Rather, keeping it as an
implementation detail through an iterator is less confusing and is less
code.
Reviewed By: rnk
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110885
This patch allows iterating typed enum via the ADT/Sequence utility.
It also changes the original design to better separate concerns:
- `StrongInt` only deals with safe `intmax_t` operations,
- `SafeIntIterator` presents the iterator and reverse iterator
interface but only deals with safe `StrongInt` internally.
- `iota_range` only deals with `SafeIntIterator` internally.
This design ensures that operations are always valid. In particular,
"Out of bounds" assertions fire when:
- the `value_type` is not representable as an `intmax_t`
- iterator operations make internal computation underflow/overflow
- the internal representation cannot be converted back to `value_type`
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106279
Summary:
This handles all three places where attributes could currently be - `GlobalVariable`, `Function` and `CallBase`.
For last two, it correctly handles all three possible attribute locations (return value, arguments and function itself)
There was a previous attempt at it D73853,
which was committed in rGfc62b36a000681c01e993242b583c5ec4ab48a3c,
but then reverted all the way back in rGb12176d2aafa0ccb2585aa218fc3b454ba84f2a9
due to some (osx?) test failures.
Reviewers: nickdesaulniers, dblaikie, diegotf, george.burgess.iv, jdoerfert, Tyker, arsenm
Reviewed By: nickdesaulniers
Subscribers: wdng, MaskRay, arsenm, llvm-commits, mgorny
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83351
Summary:
The output from llvm-reduce still has significantly more attributes than
bugpoint does. Teach llvm-reduce to remove attributes.
Reviewers: diegotf, dblaikie, george.burgess.iv
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73853
Arthur Eubanks