[llvm-commits] [llvm] r85295 - in /llvm/trunk: docs/tutorial/LangImpl4.html docs/tutorial/OCamlLangImpl4.html include/llvm/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.h lib/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.cpp lib/ExecutionEngine/JIT/JIT.cpp lib/ExecutionEngi

[Evan Cheng]

Yes thanks.

Evan
On Oct 27, 2009, at 3:02 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:

> Look good?
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin  
> <jyasskin at google.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com>  
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 27, 2009, at 2:11 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Evan Cheng  
>>>> <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 27, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Author: jyasskin
>>>>>> Date: Tue Oct 27 15:30:28 2009
>>>>>> New Revision: 85295
>>>>>>
>>>>>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=85295&view=rev
>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>> Change the JIT to compile eagerly by default as agreed in
>>>>>> http://llvm.org/PR5184, and beef up the comments to describe  
>>>>>> what both
>>>>>> options
>>>>>> do and the risks of lazy compilation in the presence of threads.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Jeffrey,
>>>>>
>>>>> In the future I'd prefer API changes be agreed upon by the greater
>>>>> community, not just in a bugzilla report.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry about that. Do you want me to revert this until we can ping  
>>>> llvmdev?
>>>>
>>>>> Lazy compilation is being used by some important clients. They  
>>>>> will be
>>>>> caught off guard by this change. Does this change lli default  
>>>>> behavior?
>>>>
>>>> No, it doesn't change lli's default, although that was an  
>>>> accident on
>>>> my part (maybe a fortunate accident). I did ping llvmdev last week
>>>> asking people who use the lazy JIT to look at the bug report, but I
>>>> can see how people who don't use threads with the JIT would think  
>>>> it
>>>> didn't apply to them.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I have been too busy with other things so I didn't follow  
>>> the thread.
>>>
>>> The patch changed DisableLazyCompilation to EnableLazyCompilation,  
>>> which is
>>> minor but it's a API change nevertheless.  That means clients  
>>> which are
>>> using 2.6 have to change their code in order to test against tot.  
>>> Unless
>>> this is absolutely necessary, I'd prefer not to change it.
>>
>> It's not necessary. I'd like to keep the new query method since it
>> removes some double-negatives inside the JIT, but they can easily  
>> live
>> alongside each other for the 2.7 release.
>>
>> I'll send a patch renaming Enable... back to Disable... and adding  
>> the
>> old query method back.
>>
> <revert-api-change.diff>