<div dir="ltr">Hi Leonard,<div>Is the new pass manager expected to work with sanitizers now?</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 1:25 PM Leonard Chan via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I think so far most individual projects have their own statistics on build time/performance impact on switching to the new PM, but I agree that there should at least be one place that people can reference on the impact.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 1:14 PM Philip Reames <<a href="mailto:listmail@philipreames.com" target="_blank">listmail@philipreames.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Thanks for all the hard work that went into getting it here.</p>
<p>+1</p>
<p>Can you spell out what performance validation has been done?
Informally, I know there's been quite a bit, but getting a summary
in one place for later reference would be super helpful.</p>
<p>Philip<br>
</p>
<div class="gmail-m_-107917827799036876gmail-m_5885611232982973753moz-cite-prefix">On 8/2/19 10:25 AM, Leonard Chan via
llvm-dev wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hello all,<br>
<br>
As of now, all LLVM and Clang tests have been updated/addressed
to run under the new/experimental pass manager (at least the
ones that failed when using the new PM).<br>
<br>
For those who aren't aware of what the new pass manager (PM) is,
the tl;dr is that this will serve as a replacement for the
legacy PM, and promises faster build times by restructuring how
passes are run over IR units. For some time, when someone wants
to create a new pass, they may need to implement it for both
pass managers since the legacy one is what is enabled by
default. Passes that were initially made under the new PM have
also slowly been ported over time.<br>
<br>
Now that LLVM 9.0.0 has branched, we have about 6 months before
the next release. We think it would be a good idea to take this
opportunity and make the new PM the default one which gives us
enough time to work out any kinks that might come out of this
switch before LLVM 10.0.0 branch point. We suspect that there
may be other LLVM projects that will be affected by this,
probably from unported passes.<br>
<br>
Does anyone have any opinions on this?<br>
<br>
Off the top of my head, the next immediate work would be to
update the docs with instructions on how to write or port a new
PM pass, and address any breakages for other LLVM projects.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Leonard<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="gmail-m_-107917827799036876gmail-m_5885611232982973753mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="gmail-m_-107917827799036876gmail-m_5885611232982973753moz-quote-pre">_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
<a class="gmail-m_-107917827799036876gmail-m_5885611232982973753moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<a class="gmail-m_-107917827799036876gmail-m_5885611232982973753moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>