Hi, I have just tagged the first release candidate for the 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to validate a release. If you have any questions or need something clarified, just email the list. For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform you are testing on. Thanks again to all the testers for your help. -Tom
OpenSUSE 13.1 i586 looks good OpenSUSE 13.1 x86_64 fails to compile driver.c from MultiSource/Applications/sgefa saying: /tmp/driver-becf24.s: Assembler messages: /tmp/driver-becf24.s:857: Error: operand type mismatch for `pshufd' Binaries uploaded to ftp. On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:> Hi, > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > something clarified, just email the list. > > For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > you are testing on. > > Thanks again to all the testers for your help. > > -Tom >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140412/729d906c/attachment.html>
Fedora 20 binaries uploaded, same results as with openSUSE, sgefa fails on 64bit version. On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Nikola Smiljanic <popizdeh at gmail.com>wrote:> OpenSUSE 13.1 i586 looks good > OpenSUSE 13.1 x86_64 fails to compile driver.c from > MultiSource/Applications/sgefa saying: > > /tmp/driver-becf24.s: Assembler messages: > /tmp/driver-becf24.s:857: Error: operand type mismatch for `pshufd' > > Binaries uploaded to ftp. > > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I have just tagged the first release candidate for the >> 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to >> http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to >> validate a release. If you have any questions or need >> something clarified, just email the list. >> >> For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. >> >> I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and >> have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send >> an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. >> >> When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform >> you are testing on. >> >> Thanks again to all the testers for your help. >> >> -Tom >> > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140412/104fca2b/attachment.html>
On 12/04/2014 00:02, Tom Stellard wrote:> Hi, > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > something clarified, just email the list. > > For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > >The Debian & Ubuntu packages built from the 3.4.1 branches are working fine with tests: http://llvm.org/apt/ (Sorry about the delay, I had a dead hard drive on one of my build systems). So, good work Tom! Cheers, Sylvestre
Hi Tom, Testing on OS X 10.9 was successful, e.g. no errors. Uploaded the archive to https://www.dropbox.com/s/lbz4gpzgjtbirkg/clang%2Bllvm-3.4.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin10.9.tar.xz (sorry cannot access the FTP currently, the SSH key is on another machine), MD5: db2671feebe6312c055ce68e436627fa Cheers, Sebastian Am 12.04.2014 um 00:02 schrieb Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net>:> Hi, > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > something clarified, just email the list. > > For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > you are testing on. > > Thanks again to all the testers for your help. > > -Tom
Hi All, As kindly pointed by Sebastian, please forget my point about the release script. I read the mail from Tom 2 days ago, and forgot that the script was available in the tag / branch when I acted today :( I uploaded clang+llvm-3.4.1-rc1-x86_64-unknown-ubuntu12.04.tar.xz to ftp.llvm.org. All tests are OK but: - voronoi (usual failure: not a regression) - sgefa (new: regression): "assembler message: Error: operand type mismatch for 'pshufd'" Cheers, -- Arnaud On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Arnaud Allard de Grandmaison < arnaud.adegm at gmail.com> wrote:> Hi Tom, > > I uploaded clang+llvm-3.4.1-rc1-x86_64-unknown-ubuntu12.04.tar.xz to > ftp.llvm.org. > > All tests are OK but: > - voronoi (usual failure: not a regression) > - sgefa (new: regression): "assembler message: Error: operand type > mismatch for 'pshufd'" > > In case this might help others, I attached a tweaked test-release.sh > script with support for dot releases. Comment are most welcome. At least, > the release script has the merit of documenting programmaticaly how the > release is done. It would be used this way: > utils/release/test-release.sh -release 3.4 -dot 1 -rc 1 -triple ... > > The script also warns about missing tags for sub-projects (compiler-rt, > ...) and falls back to the final non-dot-release for those subprojects. > > Cheers, > -- > Arnaud > > > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 10:26 PM, Sebastian Dreßler < > sebastian.dressler at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Tom, >> >> Testing on OS X 10.9 was successful, e.g. no errors. Uploaded the archive >> to >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/lbz4gpzgjtbirkg/clang%2Bllvm-3.4.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin10.9.tar.xz(sorry cannot access the FTP currently, the SSH key is on another machine), >> MD5: db2671feebe6312c055ce68e436627fa >> >> Cheers, >> Sebastian >> >> >> Am 12.04.2014 um 00:02 schrieb Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net>: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the >> > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to >> > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to >> > validate a release. If you have any questions or need >> > something clarified, just email the list. >> > >> > For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. >> > >> > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and >> > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send >> > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. >> > >> > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what >> platform >> > you are testing on. >> > >> > Thanks again to all the testers for your help. >> > >> > -Tom >> >> >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140414/a638370e/attachment.html>
On 04/14/2014 02:31 PM, Arnaud Allard de Grandmaison wrote:> Hi All, > > As kindly pointed by Sebastian, please forget my point about the release > script. I read the mail from Tom 2 days ago, and forgot that the script was > available in the tag / branch when I acted today :( > > I uploaded clang+llvm-3.4.1-rc1-x86_64-unknown-ubuntu12.04.tar.xz to > ftp.llvm.org. > > All tests are OK but: > - voronoi (usual failure: not a regression)I do not see this failure in my regular test suite builds after my for to voronoi in 196186. Did you use the latest test-suite version? Tobias
(Re-posting from my subscribed address. Sorry for the duplicate.) On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:> Hi, > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > something clarified, just email the list.I tried to do a 3.4.1-rc1 Windows build using the same script I used for the main 3.4 release, but I noticed that compiler-rt, lld and clang-tools-extra didn't have 3.4.1 tags, so I used 3.4-final for those. The binary is available here http://www.hanshq.net/LLVM-3.4.1-rc1-win32.exe (sha1: 1773f90a81d3fc569dd27a8d3ffa3407abf88c79). I've pinged Anton for sftp access, so hopefully I can use that for the next one. Cheers, Hans
On 11 April 2014 19:02, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:> I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > something clarified, just email the list.Hi Tom, Sorry for the delay, I'm on holidays. Just to clarify, that document is slightly outdated, I need to update it. But the bottom line is that the script downloads the correct sources and it already creates the release package.> I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out.Is this on trunk or on the release_34 branch?> When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > you are testing on.I'll run on ARMv7A Cortex-A15 Hard-float Linux (armv7a-linux-gnueabihf). It may take a while... cheers, --renato
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 12:50 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>wrote:> On 11 April 2014 19:02, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > > something clarified, just email the list. > > Hi Tom, > > Sorry for the delay, I'm on holidays. Just to clarify, that document > is slightly outdated, I need to update it. But the bottom line is that > the script downloads the correct sources and it already creates the > release package. > > > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > > Is this on trunk or on the release_34 branch? > >dot release aware test-release.sh script is in the release_34 branch.> > > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > > you are testing on. > > I'll run on ARMv7A Cortex-A15 Hard-float Linux > (armv7a-linux-gnueabihf). It may take a while... > > cheers, > --renato >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140415/3e08d4e3/attachment.html>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 07:50:32PM -0300, Renato Golin wrote:> On 11 April 2014 19:02, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > > something clarified, just email the list. > > Hi Tom, > > Sorry for the delay, I'm on holidays. Just to clarify, that document > is slightly outdated, I need to update it. But the bottom line is that > the script downloads the correct sources and it already creates the > release package. > > > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > > Is this on trunk or on the release_34 branch? >This is in the release_34 branch. -Tom> > > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > > you are testing on. > > I'll run on ARMv7A Cortex-A15 Hard-float Linux > (armv7a-linux-gnueabihf). It may take a while... > > cheers, > --renato
Hi Tom, Binary for armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf can be found at: https://www.dropbox.com/s/uhetjgzlmlxz5mq/clang%2Bllvm-3.4.1-rc1-armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz Compared to 3.4, llvm.check for phase 3 has the following differences: - new failure: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/simpletest-remote.ll - new unexpected pass: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/cross-module-sm-pic-a.ll Cheers, Erik. On 12 Apr 2014, at 0:02, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:> Hi, > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > something clarified, just email the list. > > For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > you are testing on. > > Thanks again to all the testers for your help. > > -Tom
On Sunday, April 13, 2014 12:31 AM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:> On 12/04/2014 00:02, Tom Stellard wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have just tagged the first release candidate for the >> 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to >> http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to >> validate a release. If you have any questions or need >> something clarified, just email the list. >> >> For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. >> >> I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and >> have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send >> an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. >> >> > The Debian & Ubuntu packages built from the 3.4.1 branches are working > fine with tests: > http://llvm.org/apt/ > > (Sorry about the delay, I had a dead hard drive on one of my build systems). > > So, good work Tom!I've failed a little bit on timing, and I will defer to Sylvestre for the builds, since they are nicely packaged. Here are my results on Ubuntu Saucy, compared to my installed 3.4 (clang version 3.4 (tags/RELEASE_34/final)): = Test Summary New Failures 2 Performance Regressions 198 Performance Improvements 79 Existing Failures 120 Unchanged Tests 593 Total Tests 992 All the failures are compile or execution time. The new failures are compile/execution time for MultiSource/Applications/sgefa/sgefa If I compare it to my previous run of the 3.4 built using the test-release (clang version 3.4 (tags/RELEASE_34/final)): = Tests Summary New Failures 122 New Passes 1 Performance Regressions 52 Performance Improvements 379 Added Tests 2 Unchanged Tests 436 Total Tests 992 The new pass is execution time for: MultiSource/Benchmarks/Olden/voronoi/voronoi I'm not sure why there are so many failures on compile and execution time. Ben
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 03:02:21PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:> Hi, > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > something clarified, just email the list. > > For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > you are testing on. > > Thanks again to all the testers for your help. >Test results are starting to come in, it looks like we have a few regressions: x86_64: MultiSource/Applications/sgefa ARMV7: - new failure: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/simpletest-remote.ll - new unexpected pass: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/cross-module-sm-pic-a.ll Has anyone attempted to bisect to figure out which commit broke these tests? -Tom
On 17 April 2014 10:57, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:> ARMV7: > - new failure: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/simpletest-remote.ll > - new unexpected pass: > ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/cross-module-sm-pic-a.llDon't hold the release for these. They're known to be unstable and I though we had fixed them, but clearly there's still room to improve. I just ran the release and all failures are in the execution engine, which is ok for now to be broken. No point in bisecting, since it fails randomly. I'll run the test-suite now... cheers, --renato
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 09:57:32AM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 03:02:21PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have just tagged the first release candidate for the > > 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to > > http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to > > validate a release. If you have any questions or need > > something clarified, just email the list. > > > > For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final. > > > > I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and > > have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send > > an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out. > > > > When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform > > you are testing on. > > > > Thanks again to all the testers for your help. > > > > Test results are starting to come in, it looks like we have a few > regressions: > > x86_64: > MultiSource/Applications/sgefa > > ARMV7: > - new failure: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/simpletest-remote.ll > - new unexpected pass: > ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/cross-module-sm-pic-a.ll > > > Has anyone attempted to bisect to figure out which commit broke these > tests? >Hi Jiangning, This commit that you requested be merged into the 3.4 branch has caused a regression in the MultiSource/Applications/sgefa test: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Merging r198940: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r198940 | kristof.beyls | 2014-01-10 08:44:34 -0500 (Fri, 10 Jan 2014) | 2 lines Enable -fuse-init-array for all AArch64 ELF targets by default, not just linux. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I have reverted this in the 3.4 branch, I'm guessing I merged this wrong. Here was my original attempt: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/commit/dce55aa1d529e1a07f41241c6a54b9570e0cec64 Can you merge r198940 into 3.4 and send me the correct patch. Thanks, Tom
Hi all,
My test results for 3.4.1 on powerpc-darwin8 look good
(cmake-shared built with targets: PowerPC;ARM;X86).
The 'powerpc-darwin8-rel-3.4' branch has merged the latest
'release_34'
branch (github/fangism/{llvm,clang}).
release-3.4.1 RC test logs:
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/logs/llvm-release-3.4.1-RC1b-O2-powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1-debug-check.log.bz2
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/logs/clang-release-3.4.1-RC1b-O2-powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1-debug-check.log.bz2
trees for 3.4.1:
https://github.com/fangism/llvm/tree/powerpc-darwin8-rel-3.4
https://github.com/fangism/clang/tree/powerpc-darwin8-rel-3.4
(will be tagged -3.4.1 once final)
Previously for 3.4.0 (tagged 'powerpc-darwin8-rel-3.4.0' on my github):
release-3.4.0 test logs:
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/logs/llvm-release-3.4-RC1-O2-powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1-debug-check.log.bz2
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/logs/clang-release-3.4-RC1-O2-powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1-debug-check.log.bz2
trees for 3.4.0:
https://github.com/fangism/llvm/tree/powerpc-darwin8-rel-3.4.0
https://github.com/fangism/clang/tree/powerpc-darwin8-rel-3.4.0
David
> Hi,
>
> I have just tagged the first release candidate for the
> 3.4.1 release, so testers may begin testing. Please refer to
> http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html for information on how to
> validate a release. If you have any questions or need
> something clarified, just email the list.
>
> For the 3.4.1 release we want to compare test results against 3.4-final.
>
> I have added support to the test-release.sh script for dot releases and
> have done basic testing. However, if you run into issues please send
> an email to the list and we can try to get it worked out.
>
> When you report your test results to me please remind me of what platform
> you are testing on.
>
> Thanks again to all the testers for your help.
>
> -Tom
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
--
David Fang
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/