-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.5k
Complex layout phase 2 #159981
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.
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
Draft
folkertdev
wants to merge
13
commits into
rust-lang:main
Choose a base branch
from
folkertdev:complex-layout-phase-2
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Complex layout phase 2 #159981
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
13 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
bcd883a
add Complex abi run-make test
folkertdev d8377b1
sparc: pass ZST arguments
folkertdev 28172f4
sparc: pass and return `f128` indirectly
folkertdev 3afa3ea
sparc: pass aggregate arguments by reference
folkertdev 72ff98e
add sparc c-zst revision
folkertdev dfdb235
add placeholder for amdgpu and a note on llvm 23 changes for bpf
folkertdev 07d0de8
add `TyAndLayout::complex_number`
folkertdev fa72c11
make SPARC64 `Complex` ABI GCC-compatible
folkertdev cc809f2
make SPARC `Complex` ABI GCC-compatible
folkertdev dfc0553
make mips64 `Complex` ABI GCC-compatible
folkertdev 2c539a7
_Complex for mips
folkertdev c948df9
make powerpc `Complex` ABI GCC-compatible
folkertdev 34fe97c
sparc64 cleanup
folkertdev File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
idk how you're getting that, from my testing clang 22 passes complex f32 via an indirect pointer and doesn't use any vector types:
https://clang.godbolt.org/z/676ajoT6a
assuming clang is correct, we should try to generate the same LLVM IR function signature, since that makes cross-language LTO work much better.
View changes since the review
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is not.
_ComplexABI GCC-compatible llvm/llvm-project#208917Being compatible with the standard C compiler on the platform (that determines the ABI of libcalls etc) seems more important than LTO for
_Complex. Anyhow, I'm trying to fix the discrepancy in that bottom PR.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This matters e.g. for
with
returns
The clang result is nonsense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@programmerjake do you know anyone at IBM that could review llvm/llvm-project#208917? It's not getting much attention (equivalent PR for mips and sparc have already been merged).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe lei137, since they reviewed a different PR I'm interested in? I'm not super familiar with who IBM has working on LLVM since I'm not an IBM employee.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, I just seem to remember you were working on powerpc related things, so thought you might have some personal connections. Lei is already reviewing some of my other PRs, e.g. llvm/llvm-project#209286. Hopefully they'll have time for this at some point, this kind of breakage is pretty bad...