Backport 371fcb720e15906e8c63600253afcb806b9b10d0

[LebedevRI]

/cherry-pick 371fcb7

[llvmbot]

Failed to cherry-pick: 371fcb7

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/actions/runs/1889856796

Please manually backport the fix and push it to your github fork. Once this is done, please add a comment like this:

/branch <user>/<repo>/<branch>

[LebedevRI]

/cherry-pick c9c9307
/cherry-pick 371fcb7

[llvmbot]

Failed to cherry-pick: c9c9307

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/actions/runs/1889903821

Please manually backport the fix and push it to your github fork. Once this is done, please add a comment like this:

/branch <user>/<repo>/<branch>

[LebedevRI]

/branch LebedevRI/llvm-project/issue54033

[LebedevRI]

/cherry-pick c9c9307
/cherry-pick 371fcb7

[llvmbot]

/branch llvmbot/llvm-project/issue54033

[llvmbot]

/pull-request llvmbot#101

[LebedevRI]

/cherry-pick 371fcb7

[llvmbot]

Failed to cherry-pick: 371fcb7

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/actions/runs/1893615125

Please manually backport the fix and push it to your github fork. Once this is done, please add a comment like this:

/branch <user>/<repo>/<branch>

[LebedevRI]

/cherry-pick c9c9307 371fcb7

[LebedevRI]

/branch LebedevRI/llvm-project/issue54033

[llvmbot]

/pull-request llvmbot#102

[tstellar]

@nikic What do you think about backporting these? c9c9307 371fcb7

[nikic]

This patch by itself does not fix the original rust optimization problem, so unless there is some additional motivation for this as well, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to backport it.

[LebedevRI]

I find this feedback to be rather subjective and dismissive.
Can someone point me to the objective documentation on LLVM stable release lifecycle?

[tstellar]

@LebedevRI Let's have a debate on the technical issues, why do you think this patch should be backported?

[nikic]

@LebedevRI Sorry, this was not intended to be dismissive. I assumed this was about the rust optimization issue because it was mentioned in the review and commit. Is there some other project for which this optimization is important?

As this is a feature addition rather than a bugfix, I do think there needs to be some kind of motivation to perform a release backport. Or at least that was my understanding, maybe I'm wrong on that.

[LebedevRI]

@tstellar Because it rather straight-forwardly addresses a rather surprising optimization failure.
The backport request was filed even before rc2, so i feel like this is prime backport material.

@nikic i have no current interest in rust, so that seems irrelevant to me :)
I don't know whether or not that change addressed that rust bugreport,
or merely helps it.

But let me ask again, is there a documented procedure/guidelines for the stable release process?

[tstellar]

@LebedevRI https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html#id11

[tstellar]

I'm on the fence about backporting this, but I think since it is fixing an actual issue reported by a user, that it is worth backporting.

[tstellar]

Merged: da3953f ba9ff03