llvm dev - Oct 2009 - [LLVMdev] [PATCH] docs/Bugpoint.html: mention -debug-pass=Arguments

Hi,

when reporting

http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5104

I spent quite a while trying to figure out what passes are used by
"-O1" so that I could give this list to bugpoint. It turns out
-debug-pass=Arguments is mentioned in docs/HowToSubmitABug.html but
under a chapter titled "Compile-time optimization bugs" which I
naively ignored since my bug was not a compile-time bug.

How about mentioning this more explicitely in the bugpoint
documentation along the lines of the attached patch?

best regards,
Timo Lindfors

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: llvm-doc-bugpoint-debug-arguments1.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 775 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20091012/216bb8da/attachment.patch>

On Oct 12, 2009, at 6:02 AM, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when reporting
>
> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5104
>
> I spent quite a while trying to figure out what passes are used by
> "-O1" so that I could give this list to bugpoint. It turns out
> -debug-pass=Arguments is mentioned in docs/HowToSubmitABug.html but
> under a chapter titled "Compile-time optimization bugs" which I
> naively ignored since my bug was not a compile-time bug.
>
> How about mentioning this more explicitely in the bugpoint
> documentation along the lines of the attached patch?
Looks great, applied in r83865, thanks!

-Chris

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:02 AM, Timo Juhani Lindfors
<timo.lindfors at iki.fi> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when reporting
>
> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5104
>
> I spent quite a while trying to figure out what passes are used by
> "-O1" so that I could give this list to bugpoint.
It'd be a good idea if bugpoint supports -O*.
-debug-pass=Arguments won't work in release build.
-
Devang
> It turns out
> -debug-pass=Arguments is mentioned in docs/HowToSubmitABug.html but
> under a chapter titled "Compile-time optimization bugs" which I
> naively ignored since my bug was not a compile-time bug.
>
> How about mentioning this more explicitely in the bugpoint
> documentation along the lines of the attached patch?
>
> best regards,
> Timo Lindfors
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>