Fix the usage issue of getRegMask. #141215
Conversation
|
Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project! This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified. If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page. If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers. If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide. You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums. |
|
Ping |
1 similar comment
|
Ping |
wdx727
force-pushed
the
fix_use_of_getRegMask
branch
from
3ba2612 to
3c9ff87
Compare
|
✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter. |
wdx727
force-pushed
the
fix_use_of_getRegMask
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d84a75a to
b24d57b
Compare
arsenm
left a comment
arsenm
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should test this in llvm/unittests/CodeGen/MachineOperandTest.cpp
wdx727
force-pushed
the
fix_use_of_getRegMask
branch
from
b24d57b to
91d1f4c
Compare
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
wdx727
force-pushed
the
fix_use_of_getRegMask
branch
from
8c37caf to
617ae35
Compare
|
@arsenm Thank you for your review! The auto-merge has been cancelled, and I would appreciate it if you could help merge the code. |
|
@wdx727 Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project! Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR. Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues. How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here. If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again. If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done! |
In the process of determining whether two MachineOperands are equal and calculating the hash of a MachineOperand, both MO_RegisterMask and MO_RegisterLiveOut types were uniformly handled. However, when the type is MO_RegisterLiveOut, calling getRegMask() triggers an assertion failure. This PR addresses this issue.
In the process of determining whether two MachineOperands are equal and calculating the hash of a MachineOperand, both MO_RegisterMask and MO_RegisterLiveOut types were uniformly handled. However, when the type is MO_RegisterLiveOut, calling getRegMask() triggers an assertion failure. This PR addresses this issue.
3 participants
In the process of determining whether two MachineOperands are equal and calculating the hash of a MachineOperand, both MO_RegisterMask and MO_RegisterLiveOut types were uniformly handled. However, when the type is MO_RegisterLiveOut, calling getRegMask() triggers an assertion failure. This PR addresses this issue.