-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.7k
tests: adapt array-cmp for llvm/llvm-project@f7b65011de51 #144749
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum. Use |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
The referenced commit adds a new llvm.loop.estimated_trip_count metadata entry, which shows up in this test. It was being erroneously captured by a too-broad regular expression, which this fixes such that the test passes both before and after the upstream change.
8f0fee6
to
3ec23cb
Compare
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ pub fn array_of_tuple_le(a: &[(i16, u16); 2], b: &[(i16, u16); 2]) -> bool { | |||
// CHECK: %[[B01:.+]] = load i16, ptr %[[PB01]] | |||
// CHECK-NOT: cmp | |||
// CHECK: %[[EQ01:.+]] = icmp eq i16 %[[A01]], %[[B01]] | |||
// CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %[[EQ01]], label %[[L10:.+]], label %[[EXIT_U:.+]] | |||
// CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %[[EQ01]], label %[[L10:.+]], label %[[EXIT_U:.+]]{{(, !llvm.loop ![0-9+])?}} |
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.
Does the test care about the attribute? Would it be fine if we just did something simpler like
// CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %[[EQ01]], label %[[L10:.+]], label %[[EXIT_U:.+]]{{(, !llvm.loop ![0-9+])?}} | |
// CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %[[EQ01]], label %[[L10:.+]], label %[[EXIT_U:.+]]{{,|$}} |
or maybe it'd be sufficient to just
// CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %[[EQ01]], label %[[L10:.+]], label %[[EXIT_U:.+]]{{(, !llvm.loop ![0-9+])?}} | |
// CHECK-NEXT: br i1 %[[EQ01]], label %[[L10:.+]], label %[[EXIT_U:.+]]{{,?}} |
Though I'm not sure exactly how FileCheck handles something like that.
(Note that the change has been reverted for now.) |
@rustbot author |
Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use |
The referenced commit adds a new llvm.loop.estimated_trip_count metadata entry, which shows up in this test. It was being erroneously captured by a too-broad regular expression, which this fixes such that the test passes both before and after the upstream change.
@rustbot label llvm-main