Renato Golin
2014-Jul-23 04:34 UTC
[LLVMdev] Sanitizer (compiler-rt) build errors on Linux bootstrap
The following bot is broken: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/builds/4016 because of the following change (SVN r213684): http://reviews.llvm.org/D4614 But it seems to build fine on my machine... I don't know enough about CMake to tell, but that seemed to be a bug/feature in CMake to which needed the work-around. Now, just looks like the work-around is broken. Should I revert the patch? cheers, --renato
Renato Golin
2014-Jul-23 04:57 UTC
[LLVMdev] Sanitizer (compiler-rt) build errors on Linux bootstrap
Sumanth, I reverted the patch, as doing so fixed the build. Please review the patch. --renato On 23 July 2014 05:34, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:> The following bot is broken: > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/builds/4016 > > because of the following change (SVN r213684): > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D4614 > > But it seems to build fine on my machine... I don't know enough about > CMake to tell, but that seemed to be a bug/feature in CMake to which > needed the work-around. Now, just looks like the work-around is > broken. > > Should I revert the patch? > > cheers, > --renato
sgundapa
2014-Jul-23 21:01 UTC
[LLVMdev] Sanitizer (compiler-rt) build errors on Linux bootstrap
I see the x86_64 assembly has issues. floatundixf.S:13: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.rodata' Refer to http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/builds/4016/steps/build%20stage1%20clang/logs/stdio Probably, this is the first time the buildbot is compiling the assembly files because of my patch. The issue is with x86 assembly. Any x86 experts to fix this? For the time being can I disable compiling x86 assembly and push a new patch? --Sumanth G -----Original Message----- From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 9:57 PM To: LLVM Dev; sgundapa Subject: Re: Sanitizer (compiler-rt) build errors on Linux bootstrap Sumanth, I reverted the patch, as doing so fixed the build. Please review the patch. --renato On 23 July 2014 05:34, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:> The following bot is broken: > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/bui > lds/4016 > > because of the following change (SVN r213684): > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D4614 > > But it seems to build fine on my machine... I don't know enough about > CMake to tell, but that seemed to be a bug/feature in CMake to which > needed the work-around. Now, just looks like the work-around is > broken. > > Should I revert the patch? > > cheers, > --renato
sgundapa
2014-Jul-25 23:25 UTC
[LLVMdev] Sanitizer (compiler-rt) build errors on Linux bootstrap
Ping ! -----Original Message----- From: sgundapa [mailto:sgundapa at codeaurora.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 2:02 PM To: 'Renato Golin'; 'LLVM Dev'; t.p.northover at gmail.com Subject: RE: Sanitizer (compiler-rt) build errors on Linux bootstrap I see the x86_64 assembly has issues. floatundixf.S:13: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.rodata' Refer to http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/builds/4016/steps/build%20stage1%20clang/logs/stdio Probably, this is the first time the buildbot is compiling the assembly files because of my patch. The issue is with x86 assembly. Any x86 experts to fix this? For the time being can I disable compiling x86 assembly and push a new patch? --Sumanth G -----Original Message----- From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 9:57 PM To: LLVM Dev; sgundapa Subject: Re: Sanitizer (compiler-rt) build errors on Linux bootstrap Sumanth, I reverted the patch, as doing so fixed the build. Please review the patch. --renato On 23 July 2014 05:34, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:> The following bot is broken: > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap/bui > lds/4016 > > because of the following change (SVN r213684): > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D4614 > > But it seems to build fine on my machine... I don't know enough about > CMake to tell, but that seemed to be a bug/feature in CMake to which > needed the work-around. Now, just looks like the work-around is > broken. > > Should I revert the patch? > > cheers, > --renato