[llvm-commits] [llvm] r165126 - /llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Utils/BypassSlowDivision.cpp

[David Blaikie]

they should be in the 'unittests' subdirectory of the llvm source
tree: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/unittests/ - I'm
not sure if any go as far as you'd have to to test this sort of
functionality

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Nowicki, Tyler <tyler.nowicki at intel.com> wrote:
> I'm having trouble finding LLVM unit/API-level tests in the source tree where are they located?
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Blaikie [mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 2:13 PM
>> To: Nowicki, Tyler
>> Cc: Gurd, Preston; llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>> Subject: Re: [llvm-commits] [llvm] r165126 -
>> /llvm/trunk/lib/Transforms/Utils/BypassSlowDivision.cpp
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Nowicki, Tyler <tyler.nowicki at intel.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > There are several tests for this optimization located in
>> test\CodeGen\X86\atom-bypass-slow-division.ll. These test use LLC. When
>> using LLC types are created from the global context. Bypass types are
>> specified using the global context so this works fine. However, Clang does
>> not use the global context. Prior to this patch, div/rem instruction types
>> would not match those in the BypassTypeMap. I added tests to Clang to
>> ensure this optimization is used by Clang.
>>
>> Then this might necessitate an LLVM unit/API-level test if llc is insufficient.
>>
>> > I am looking into Hal's question on why Clang does not use the global
>> context.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Tyler
>> >
>> >> > Tests for this will be done as a separate patch to Clang.
>> >>
>> >> Ideally LLVM changes should have LLVM tests, otherwise we risk
>> >> regressing LLVM accidentally if we don't validate against Clang.
>> >>
>> >> Is there a reason this cannot be tested at the LLVM level?