Repository navigation
Conversation
Contributor
|
I think @amd-eochoalo got there first with PR #9859! |
kuhar
requested changes
Aug 7, 2026
kuhar
left a comment
kuhar
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd rather rename these helpers so that we can keep using the same regex instead of special-casing it for gfx1250
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The GCC sanitizer job was matching the legitimate
writes_exechelper because the model-only check rejected any_exec(symbol. Narrow the check to the actual gfx1250 execution-only operand methods.Issue Tracking
Related: #7025
Test