Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Remove "release:cherry-pick-failed" label if later cherry pick succeeds? #54167

Closed
nikic opened this issue Mar 3, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

Remove "release:cherry-pick-failed" label if later cherry pick succeeds? #54167

nikic opened this issue Mar 3, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees
@tstellar
Labels
infrastructure Bugs about LLVM infrastructure

Comments

@nikic
Copy link
Contributor

nikic commented Mar 3, 2022

If the first cherry-pick fails but a later one succeeds, it would probably make sense to automatically drop the label, to make it clear that the backport request is not blocked on conflict resolution anymore.

cc @tstellar
@nikic nikic added the infrastructure Bugs about LLVM infrastructure label Mar 3, 2022
@llvmbot
Copy link
Member

llvmbot commented Mar 3, 2022

@llvm/issue-subscribers-infrastructure

@tstellar tstellar self-assigned this Mar 3, 2022
@nikic
Copy link
Contributor Author

nikic commented Mar 13, 2022

For reference, there's a patch for this here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121032

@nikic
Copy link
Contributor Author

nikic commented Apr 21, 2022

Patch landed in 3929f91.

@nikic nikic closed this as completed Apr 21, 2022
kovdan01 added a commit to kovdan01/llvm-project that referenced this issue Sep 18, 2024
@kovdan01 @atrosinenko
[PAC][CodeGen] Do not emit trivial 'mov xN xN' on tail call
2a7788b 
Under some conditions, a trivial `mov xN xN` instruction was emitted on
tail calls. Consider the following code:

```
class Test {
public:
  virtual void f() {}
};

void call_f(Test *t) {
  t->f();
}
```

Correponding assembly:

```
_Z6call_fP4Test:
        ldr     x16, [x0]
        mov     x17, x0
        movk    x17, llvm#6503, lsl llvm#48
        autda   x16, x17
        ldr     x1, [x16]
 =====> mov     x16, x16
        movk    x16, llvm#54167, lsl llvm#48
        braa    x1, x16
```

This patch makes such movs being omitted.

Co-authored-by: Anatoly Trosinenko <atrosinenko@accesssoftek.com>
kovdan01 added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 19, 2024
@kovdan01 @atrosinenko
[PAC][CodeGen] Do not emit trivial 'mov xN, xN' on tail call (#109100)
3d5e8e4 
Under some conditions, a trivial `mov xN xN` instruction was emitted on
tail calls. Consider the following code:

```
class Test {
public:
  virtual void f() {}
};

void call_f(Test *t) {
  t->f();
}
```

Correponding assembly:

```
_Z6call_fP4Test:
        ldr     x16, [x0]
        mov     x17, x0
        movk    x17, #6503, lsl #48
        autda   x16, x17
        ldr     x1, [x16]
 =====> mov     x16, x16
        movk    x16, #54167, lsl #48
        braa    x1, x16
```

This patch makes such movs being omitted.

Co-authored-by: Anatoly Trosinenko <atrosinenko@accesssoftek.com>
tmsri pushed a commit to tmsri/llvm-project that referenced this issue Sep 19, 2024
@kovdan01 @atrosinenko @tmsri
[PAC][CodeGen] Do not emit trivial 'mov xN, xN' on tail call (llvm#10…
8909e6d 
…9100)

Under some conditions, a trivial `mov xN xN` instruction was emitted on
tail calls. Consider the following code:

```
class Test {
public:
  virtual void f() {}
};

void call_f(Test *t) {
  t->f();
}
```

Correponding assembly:

```
_Z6call_fP4Test:
        ldr     x16, [x0]
        mov     x17, x0
        movk    x17, llvm#6503, lsl llvm#48
        autda   x16, x17
        ldr     x1, [x16]
 =====> mov     x16, x16
        movk    x16, llvm#54167, lsl llvm#48
        braa    x1, x16
```

This patch makes such movs being omitted.

Co-authored-by: Anatoly Trosinenko <atrosinenko@accesssoftek.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@tstellar tstellar

Labels
infrastructure Bugs about LLVM infrastructure
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@tstellar @nikic @llvmbot