Skip to content

Conversation

@david-arm
Copy link
Contributor

I now have the time and am willing to help out with code reviews, tidy up tests, clean up code, etc. Over the last few years I've done quite a lot of vectoriser work, which includes adding support for scalable vectors with tail-folding and this year working towards vectorisation of loops with uncountable early exits. I've also been actively engaged with reviewing upstream loop vectoriser patches, and submitting NFC clean-up patches.

Now that we can have a list of maintainers per area I thought perhaps it's worth formalising things by adding myself as a secondary maintainer if others are happy?

Not entirely sure who to add as reviewers on this PR though!

I now have the time and am willing to help out with code reviews,
tidy up tests, clean up code, etc. Over the last few years I've done
quite a lot of vectoriser work, which  includes adding support for
scalable vectors with tail-folding and this year working towards
vectorisation of loops with uncountable early exits. I've also been
actively engaged with reviewing upstream loop vectoriser patches,
and submitting NFC clean-up patches.

Now that we can have a list of maintainers per area I thought perhaps
it's worth formalising things by adding myself as a secondary
maintainer if others are happy?
Copy link
Collaborator

@paulwalker-arm paulwalker-arm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know how much my vote counts but given your years service in this area and likely one of the most knowledge when it comes to vectorisation using scalable vectors I believe your involvement would help ease the burden on Florian and is thus worth consideration.

@banach-space
Copy link
Contributor

Not entirely sure who to add as reviewers on this PR though!

To help move this forward, the LLVM Developer Policy states:

The PR will be accepted so long as at least one maintainer in the same project vouches for their ability to perform the responsibilities and there are no explicit objections raised by the community.

@fhahn, as the sole maintainer for LoopVectorize, your input is needed to unblock this :) Thanks in advance!

@david-arm
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm not sure if I have understood the policy correctly as described in https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#maintainers.

I'm happy with whatever decision we take, but it would be good to know either way so I can either close or merge the PR. Thanks!

@david-arm
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing PR due to lack of interest

@david-arm david-arm closed this Sep 18, 2025
@kiranchandramohan
Copy link
Contributor

I was just going through some data from https://app.graphite.dev/insights. I see that @david-arm has reviewed around 363 patches and contributed around 70 patches, most of them related to loop vectorisation.

Thanks @david-arm for your volunteering and service for LLVM in general and the LoopVectorizer in particular. Hope you will continue your participation.

Copy link
Contributor

@fhahn fhahn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah sorry I missed responding to this one! More than happy to have more maintainers. IMO not being listed as maintainer should also not discourage people to triage issues, do reviews etc.

@paulwalker-arm
Copy link
Collaborator

paulwalker-arm commented Sep 18, 2025

@fhahn - If you're happy to accept @david-arm as a maintainer than please reopen and accept the PR. As it stands we're assuming this is not the case, which we're fine with, but it would be unfortunate for Dave to miss out if it's just a case of you missing an email notification.

@llvm llvm deleted a comment from bipmis Sep 18, 2025
@fhahn fhahn reopened this Sep 21, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@fhahn fhahn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll leave it to @david-arm to merge the PR

@david-arm
Copy link
Contributor Author

OK thank you @fhahn!

@david-arm david-arm merged commit c890a90 into llvm:main Sep 23, 2025
9 checks passed
@llvm-ci
Copy link
Collaborator

llvm-ci commented Sep 23, 2025

LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu running on doug-worker-1a while building llvm at step 6 "test-build-unified-tree-check-cross-project".

Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/181/builds/28420

Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference
Step 6 (test-build-unified-tree-check-cross-project) failure: test (failure)
******************** TEST 'cross-project-tests :: debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/func.cpp' FAILED ********************
Exit Code: 2

Command Output (stderr):
--
clang++ -O0 -glldb -std=gnu++11 /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/func.cpp -o /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/projects/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/Output/func.cpp.tmp # RUN: at line 8
+ clang++ -O0 -glldb -std=gnu++11 /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/func.cpp -o /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/projects/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/Output/func.cpp.tmp
"/usr/bin/python3.8" "/home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/dexter.py" test --fail-lt 1.0 -w -v --debugger lldb-dap --lldb-executable "/home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/bin/lldb-dap" --dap-message-log=-e --binary /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/projects/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/Output/func.cpp.tmp -- /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/func.cpp | /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/bin/FileCheck /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/func.cpp # RUN: at line 9
+ /usr/bin/python3.8 /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/dexter.py test --fail-lt 1.0 -w -v --debugger lldb-dap --lldb-executable /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/bin/lldb-dap --dap-message-log=-e --binary /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/projects/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/Output/func.cpp.tmp -- /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/func.cpp
+ /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/bin/FileCheck /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/llvm-project/cross-project-tests/debuginfo-tests/dexter/feature_tests/commands/perfect/expect_step_kind/func.cpp
note: Opening DAP server: /home/buildbot/buildbot-root/cross-project-tests-sie-ubuntu/build/bin/lldb-dap
-> {
  "type": "request",
  "command": "initialize",
  "arguments": {
    "clientID": "dexter",
    "adapterID": "lldb-dap",
    "pathFormat": "path",
    "linesStartAt1": true,
    "columnsStartAt1": true,
    "supportsVariableType": true,
    "supportsVariablePaging": true,
    "supportsRunInTerminalRequest": false
  },
  "seq": 1
}
<- {
  "body": {
    "$__lldb_version": "lldb version 22.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git revision c890a9050e880d807b5bed911c4e0fe046a72e6a)\n  clang revision c890a9050e880d807b5bed911c4e0fe046a72e6a\n  llvm revision c890a9050e880d807b5bed911c4e0fe046a72e6a",
    "completionTriggerCharacters": [
      ".",
      " ",
      "\t"
    ],
    "exceptionBreakpointFilters": [
      {
        "description": "C++ Catch",
        "filter": "cpp_catch",
        "label": "C++ Catch",
        "supportsCondition": true
      },
      {
        "description": "C++ Throw",
        "filter": "cpp_throw",
        "label": "C++ Throw",
        "supportsCondition": true
      },
      {
        "description": "Objective-C Catch",
        "filter": "objc_catch",
...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants