On Mar 9, 2012, at 7:35 AM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
> There used to be a list of all the llvm ports and the status. The x86
> was the only compiler
> that was a "full port".
>
> We are preparing to add out native linux compiler to the official build
> bots.
>
> Are there various official "gating" criteria for different levels
of
> llvm "doneness" so to speak?
>
> There is a matrix I see in
> http://llvm.org/releases/3.0/docs/CodeGenerator.html#targetfeatures
> which seems to be old. For example, I would definitely consider the MIPS
> port to be reliable and other
> things like .o writing are definitely in there.
>
> The various current llvm build bots seem to do different levels of testing.
While some platforms have very mature code and are generally reliable, we do not
list them as officially supported because they don't go through the official
release testing that X86 goes through. The official release testing is a fairly
lengthy testing process (usually about a month) where we test clang/LLVM before
we are confident that it can be called an official release. This involves
running the full testsuite and making sure that there are no regressions from
the previous release, and having the community compile their projects with the
compiler and reporting any issues.
We don't say that we support anything other that X86 because we don't
have resources -- both testers and equipment -- to run an official release on
them. If we do have the resources, then we would be glad to list them as
officially supported. The caveat being that testing is a fairly extensive
commitment, but is very very welcome. :-)
-bw