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 @ followed by their GitHub username.

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.

@llvm/pr-subscribers-testing-tools

Author: Tommaso Fellegara (Felle33)

diff --git a/llvm/utils/UpdateTestChecks/asm.py b/llvm/utils/UpdateTestChecks/asm.py
index 3754aa2eeba85..ee70d837d7b7a 100644
--- a/llvm/utils/UpdateTestChecks/asm.py
+++ b/llvm/utils/UpdateTestChecks/asm.py
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ class string:
 )
 
 ASM_FUNCTION_ARM_RE = re.compile(
-    r'^(?P<func>[0-9a-zA-Z_$]+):[ \t]*@+[ \t]*@"?(?P=func)"?\n'  # f: (name of function)
+    r'^(?P<func>[0-9a-zA-Z_$]+):[ \t]*(@+[ \t]*@"?(?P=func)"?)?\n'  # f: (name of function)
     r"(?:\.L(?P=func)\$local:\n)?"  # drop .L<func>$local:
     r"(?:\s*\.type\s+\.L(?P=func)\$local,@function\n)?"  # drop .type .L<func>$local
     r"\s+\.fnstart\n"  # .fnstart

@RKSimon

fp16-promote.ll, cse-flags.ll: in these files there are some file_checks directives outside the function and this leads to an error since the update script rewrites the directives inside the function.

This is pretty common - the update script shouldn't touch comments outside functions so if the original CHECKS were put above the function then they won't get stripped and the lit test will fail as it ends up with duplicate checks - if a test file doesn't already have the "Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_llc_test_checks.py" note I wouldn't worry.

@jrtc27 please can you review - I think #139844 introduced the regression - should the other arm/thumb regexp be updated similarly?

@jrtc27 please can you review - I think #139844 introduced the regression - should the other arm/thumb regexp be updated similarly?

I assume so. Currently travelling but will take a look when I can this week. I think I copied this from another target’s but it’s possible I had to edit it and botched that.

Is there something I can do on my side? I could work on the AArch64 files, but I have not found a file that was updated with the script and the flag --asm-verbose=false was passed at the same time

Can you update the other regex patterns that were updated in the same patch?

@Felle33 any luck with the other patterns that @jrtc27 updated in #139844?

Sorry, I was a little bit busy this week. I will try to tackle the issue in the next few days

The only things that I have modified are:

• To capture the name of the function in AArch64 I had to specify the [a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9]*
• the optionality to have the second part of the signature at the beginning of the assembly function @@<func_name> for the other regex

I tested these regex with the ARM/ifcvt-iter-indbr.ll, ARM/atomic-cmpxchg.ll and AArch64/arm64-arith.ll

@Felle33 please can you investigate the CI failures:

2025-07-28T07:53:27.9753330Z Failed Tests (2):
2025-07-28T07:53:27.9753700Z   LLVM :: tools/UpdateTestChecks/update_llc_test_checks/aarch64-function-name.test
2025-07-28T07:53:27.9754265Z   LLVM :: tools/UpdateTestChecks/update_llc_test_checks/aarch64_generated_funcs.test

Sure, unfortunately now I cannot do it, is it a problem if I will do it next week?

Unless @jrtc27 has any comments I think this looks ok to me - @Felle33 please can you merge against trunk latest?

@Felle33 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!

@RKSimon - Thanks for the patience 😃

This change broke update_llc_test_checks.py for quite a few files I work on, recently:

• llvm/test/CodeGen/AArch64/sme-za-exceptions.ll
• and llvm/test/CodeGen/AArch64/win-sve.ll

But more too, I think. I was wondering what broke update_llc_test_checks... Please fix the AArch64 regexes or revert this change.

But more too, I think. I was wondering what broke update_llc_test_checks... Please fix the AArch64 regexes or revert this change.

@MacDue Sorry I missed this :/