[llvm-dev] OptBisect implementation for new pass manager (original) (raw)

Fedor Sergeev via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Sep 26 11:35:43 PDT 2018

I would really like to separate OptBisect and New-PM-by-default discussions! :)

regards,   Fedor.

On 09/26/2018 09:13 PM, David Greene wrote:

I'm concerned about codegen. If Codegen is not yet ready for the new PM, should the new PM really become default? I would at least like to see a plan of how Codegen is going to migrate before the new PM becomes default. Codegen pass pipelines have been wonky ever since I started working with LLVM and it would be nice to get that cleaned up.

-David Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com> writes:

Well, I think we don't have a clear idea about new-PM codegen should work in general. Is this really something that concerns us right now?

Philip On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 7:54 PM Friedman, Eli <efriedma at codeaurora.org> wrote: On 9/26/2018 10:47 AM, Philip Pfaffe via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi Fedor, > > can you make an example where a pass actually needs to opt-out? > Because IMO, bisect should quite literally to DebugCounter-style skip > every step in every ::run method's loop. Passes should not even be > concerned with this. This isn't so much an issue for the optimization pipeline, but code generation involves some passes which are mandatory (e.g. isel). -Eli -- Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list