Add nuw attribute to inbounds GEPs where the expression used to form the
GEP is an addition of unsigned indices.

Relands #105496, which was reverted because it exposed a miscompilation
arising from #98608. This is now fixed by #106512.

Reverts llvm/llvm-project#105496

This patch breaks:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/25/builds/1952
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/52/builds/1775

Somehow output is different with sanitizers.
Maybe non-determinism in the code?

Add nuw attribute to inbounds GEPs where the expression used to form the
GEP is an addition of unsigned indices.

This patch fixes the dynamic schedule tracking.

Reapplication of 7339c0f782d5c70e0928f8991b0c05338a90c84c with a fix
for a crash involving arrays without a size expression.

Clang supports VLAs in C++ as an extension, but we currently only warn
on their use when you pass -Wvla, -Wvla-extension, or -pedantic.
However, VLAs as they're expressed in C have been considered by WG21
and rejected, are easy to use accidentally to the surprise of users
(e.g., https://ddanilov.me/default-non-standard-features/), and they
have potential security implications beyond constant-size arrays
(https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/ARR32-C.+Ensure+size+arguments+for+variable+length+arrays+are+in+a+valid+range).
C++ users should strongly consider using other functionality such as
std::vector instead.

This seems like sufficiently compelling evidence to warn users about
VLA use by default in C++ modes. This patch enables the -Wvla-extension
diagnostic group in C++ language modes by default, and adds the warning
group to -Wall in GNU++ language modes. The warning is still opt-in in
C language modes, where support for VLAs is somewhat less surprising to
users.

RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-diagnosing-use-of-vlas-in-c/73109
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/62836
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D156565

This reverts commit 7339c0f782d5c70e0928f8991b0c05338a90c84c.

Breaks bots:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/139/builds/51875
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/164/builds/45262

Clang supports VLAs in C++ as an extension, but we currently only warn
on their use when you pass -Wvla, -Wvla-extension, or -pedantic.
However, VLAs as they're expressed in C have been considered by WG21
and rejected, are easy to use accidentally to the surprise of users
(e.g., https://ddanilov.me/default-non-standard-features/), and they
have potential security implications beyond constant-size arrays
(https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/ARR32-C.+Ensure+size+arguments+for+variable+length+arrays+are+in+a+valid+range).
C++ users should strongly consider using other functionality such as
std::vector instead.

This seems like sufficiently compelling evidence to warn users about
VLA use by default in C++ modes. This patch enables the -Wvla-extension
diagnostic group in C++ language modes by default, and adds the warning
group to -Wall in GNU++ language modes. The warning is still opt-in in
C language modes, where support for VLAs is somewhat less surprising to
users.

RFC: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-diagnosing-use-of-vlas-in-c/73109
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/62836
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D156565

Just re-running the script to make future updates easier

This allows use with non-0 address space stacks. llvm_ptr_ty should
never be used. This could use some more percolation up through mlir,
but this is enough to fix existing tests.

https://reviews.llvm.org/D156666

This patch prefixes omp outlined helpers and reduction funcs
with the original function's name.

Reviewed By: jdoerfert

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D140722