I went over the output of the following mess of a command:
`(ulimit -m 2000000; ulimit -v 2000000; git ls-files -z | parallel --xargs -0 cat | aspell list --mode=none --ignore-case | grep -E '^[A-Za-z][a-z]*$' | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | grep -vE '.{25}' | aspell pipe -W3 | grep : | cut -d' ' -f2 | less)`
and proceeded to spend a few days looking at it to find probable typos
and fixed a few hundred of them in all of the llvm project (note, the
ones I found are not anywhere near all of them, but it seems like a
good start).
Reviewed By: inclyc
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D131167
The `opt -analyze` option only works with the legacy pass manager and might be removed in the future, as explained in llvm.org/PR53733. This patch introduced -polly-print-* passes that print what the pass would print with the `-analyze` option and replaces all uses of `-analyze` in the regression tests.
There are two exceptions: `CodeGen\single_loop_param_less_equal.ll` and `CodeGen\loop_with_condition_nested.ll` use `-analyze on the `-loops` pass which is not part of Polly.
Reviewed By: aeubanks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D120782
These flags are now always passed to all tests and need to be disabled if
not needed. Disabling these flags, rather than passing them to almost all
tests, significantly simplfies our RUN: lines.
llvm-svn: 249422
This patch replaces the last legacy part of the domain generation, namely the
ScalarEvolution part that was used to obtain loop bounds. We now iterate over
the loops in the region and propagate the back edge condition to the header
blocks. Afterwards we propagate the new information once through the whole
region. In this process we simply ignore unbounded parts of the domain and
thereby assume the absence of infinite loops.
+ This patch already identified a couple of broken unit tests we had for
years.
+ We allow more loops already and the step to multiple exit and multiple back
edges is minimal.
+ It allows to model the overflow checks properly as we actually visit
every block in the SCoP and know where which condition is evaluated.
- It is currently not compatible with modulo constraints in the
domain.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12499
llvm-svn: 247279
Gabriel Ravier