After a few attempts I think we’re in sight of success: we only have the two following bots remaining with old versions of libstdc++ and new versions of clang: polly-amd64-linux polly-arm-linux Once fixed the toolchain bump should stick.> On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:07 PM, JF Bastien via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > >> On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:03 PM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org <mailto:asb at asbradbury.org>> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 21:05, JF Bastien via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >>> >>> The patch is about ready to land, which means any older compiler will soft-error (which you can turn off with LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN). I think we should then cherry-pick the patch to the LLVM 8 branch. >>> >>> The last remaining issue are the buildbots. I audited *all* bots in http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves <http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves> (there's so many!). Some of them are down, I therefore have no idea what they run. Here are the bots that will definitely break, with their maintainers: >>> >>> Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>> >>> am1i-slv1 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 >>> as-bldslv4 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) >>> ps4-buildslave2 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) >>> >>> Hexagon QA <llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com <mailto:llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com>> >>> hexagon-build-02 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 >>> hexagon-build-03 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 >>> >>> Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com <mailto:vitalybuka at google.com>> >>> sanitizer-buildbot6 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 >>> >>> Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com <mailto:rnk at google.com>> >>> sanitizer-windows -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) >>> >>> Ilia Taraban <mstester.llvm at gmail.com <mailto:mstester.llvm at gmail.com>> >>> windows7-buildbot -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) >>> >>> >>> The maintainers have 3 options: >>> >>> 1. Pass LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN to their bot, suffer breakage later. >>> 2. Update the bot to a newer compiler version. >>> 3. Entirely turn down the bot. >>> >>> I’ve emailed the maintainers and some have already responded. Once all bots are in a good state I’ll commit the patch (unless someone else chimes in with new information). >> >> Did anyone pick option 1)? If I understand correctly, we probably want >> to ensure that at least some bots do this, so we can ensure an old >> compiler + LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN build actually remains >> functional up until the point support for the old compiler is actually >> removed. > > Reid asked me to do so for sanitizer-windows: > https://reviews.llvm.org/D57525 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D57525> > > Ideally yes we’d have bots covering all eventualities, but this is but one of many holes in our coverage. On the upside, that hole is disappearing in a few months :) > > >> Best, >> >> Alex > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190201/b9e3b83d/attachment-0001.html>
It seems the CMake changes have landed; but the docs are still a bit out of date? CMake.html talks about LLVM_FORCE_USE_OLD_TOOLCHAIN but not LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN. Also, it looks like LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN is not propagated down to the NATIVE configuration when you set LLVM_OPTIMIZED_TABLEGEN. If that's going to be a permanent deficiency, it should be mentioned in the docs as well. Thanks, --paulr From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of JF Bastien via llvm-dev Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2019 1:04 AM To: via llvm-dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] migrating past C++11 After a few attempts I think we’re in sight of success: we only have the two following bots remaining with old versions of libstdc++ and new versions of clang: polly-amd64-linux polly-arm-linux Once fixed the toolchain bump should stick. On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:07 PM, JF Bastien via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:03 PM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org<mailto:asb at asbradbury.org>> wrote: On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 21:05, JF Bastien via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: The patch is about ready to land, which means any older compiler will soft-error (which you can turn off with LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN). I think we should then cherry-pick the patch to the LLVM 8 branch. The last remaining issue are the buildbots. I audited *all* bots in http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves (there's so many!). Some of them are down, I therefore have no idea what they run. Here are the bots that will definitely break, with their maintainers: Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com<mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>> am1i-slv1 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 as-bldslv4 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) ps4-buildslave2 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) Hexagon QA <llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com<mailto:llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com>> hexagon-build-02 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 hexagon-build-03 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com<mailto:vitalybuka at google.com>> sanitizer-buildbot6 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com<mailto:rnk at google.com>> sanitizer-windows -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) Ilia Taraban <mstester.llvm at gmail.com<mailto:mstester.llvm at gmail.com>> windows7-buildbot -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) The maintainers have 3 options: 1. Pass LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN to their bot, suffer breakage later. 2. Update the bot to a newer compiler version. 3. Entirely turn down the bot. I’ve emailed the maintainers and some have already responded. Once all bots are in a good state I’ll commit the patch (unless someone else chimes in with new information). Did anyone pick option 1)? If I understand correctly, we probably want to ensure that at least some bots do this, so we can ensure an old compiler + LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN build actually remains functional up until the point support for the old compiler is actually removed. Reid asked me to do so for sanitizer-windows: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57525 Ideally yes we’d have bots covering all eventualities, but this is but one of many holes in our coverage. On the upside, that hole is disappearing in a few months :) Best, Alex _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190207/34f972c4/attachment.html>
Indeed this has finally stuck, with just clang-with-lto-ubuntu broken at the moment. I’m inclined to leave it checked in, and try to get it into the LLVM 8 branch as well.> On Feb 7, 2019, at 9:18 AM, paul.robinson at sony.com wrote: > > It seems the CMake changes have landed; but the docs are still a bit out of date? > CMake.html talks about LLVM_FORCE_USE_OLD_TOOLCHAIN but not LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN.I’m. Not sure how one updates the website’s docs, I had assumed the RST files would automatically get rebuilt and pushed? Agreed we want it fixed, but I don’t think it’s good reason to revert since the error message is pretty clear.> Also, it looks like LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN is not propagated down to the NATIVE configuration when you set LLVM_OPTIMIZED_TABLEGEN. If that's going to be a permanent deficiency, it should be mentioned in the docs as well.Someone mentioned MSVC was having issues that way? https://reviews.llvm.org/rL353374#624722 <https://reviews.llvm.org/rL353374#624722> That seems like general badness in the way that configuration is set up, no? It should probably get fixed separately.> Thanks, > --paulr > <> > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of JF Bastien via llvm-dev > Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2019 1:04 AM > To: via llvm-dev > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] migrating past C++11 > > After a few attempts I think we’re in sight of success: we only have the two following bots remaining with old versions of libstdc++ and new versions of clang: > > polly-amd64-linux > polly-arm-linux > > Once fixed the toolchain bump should stick. > > > On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:07 PM, JF Bastien via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:03 PM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org <mailto:asb at asbradbury.org>> wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 21:05, JF Bastien via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > > The patch is about ready to land, which means any older compiler will soft-error (which you can turn off with LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN). I think we should then cherry-pick the patch to the LLVM 8 branch. > > The last remaining issue are the buildbots. I audited *all* bots in http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves <http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves> (there's so many!). Some of them are down, I therefore have no idea what they run. Here are the bots that will definitely break, with their maintainers: > > Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com <mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com>> > am1i-slv1 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 > as-bldslv4 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) > ps4-buildslave2 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) > > Hexagon QA <llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com <mailto:llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com>> > hexagon-build-02 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 > hexagon-build-03 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 > > Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com <mailto:vitalybuka at google.com>> > sanitizer-buildbot6 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 > > Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com <mailto:rnk at google.com>> > sanitizer-windows -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) > > Ilia Taraban <mstester.llvm at gmail.com <mailto:mstester.llvm at gmail.com>> > windows7-buildbot -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) > > > The maintainers have 3 options: > > 1. Pass LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN to their bot, suffer breakage later. > 2. Update the bot to a newer compiler version. > 3. Entirely turn down the bot. > > I’ve emailed the maintainers and some have already responded. Once all bots are in a good state I’ll commit the patch (unless someone else chimes in with new information). > > Did anyone pick option 1)? If I understand correctly, we probably want > to ensure that at least some bots do this, so we can ensure an old > compiler + LLVM_TEMPORARILY_ALLOW_OLD_TOOLCHAIN build actually remains > functional up until the point support for the old compiler is actually > removed. > > Reid asked me to do so for sanitizer-windows: > https://reviews.llvm.org/D57525 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D57525> > > Ideally yes we’d have bots covering all eventualities, but this is but one of many holes in our coverage. On the upside, that hole is disappearing in a few months :) > > > > Best, > > Alex > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190207/2be24bec/attachment-0001.html>