llvm dev - Mar 2015 - [LLVMdev] Reminder 3.5.2 merge deadline is Monday, Mar 16 - Testers needed

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 01:51:32PM -0700, Tom Stellard
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:04:35PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Just a reminder that testing for 3.5.2 will begin on Monday, Mar 16. 
If
> > you have any patches you want merged please send an email to the
> > relevant commits list and cc me and the code owner.  If you have
already
> > done this and are waiting for a response, please ping the thread.
> > 
> > As always we need testers, so let me know if you want to help with
> > testing.
> > 
> 
> Update:
> 
> I'm in the process of merging some last minute patches, so testing will
> be delayed until Tuesday (probably around 21:00 UTC).
> 
LLVM 3.5.2-rc1 has been tagged and is ready for testing.  Just a
reminder that we should be using llvm 3.5.1 as the reference for
regression testing.

-Tom
> -Tom
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Tom
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 11:13 AM, Tom Stellard
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 01:51:32PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:04:35PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Just a reminder that testing for 3.5.2 will begin on Monday, Mar
16.  If
>>> you have any patches you want merged please send an email to the
>>> relevant commits list and cc me and the code owner.  If you have
already
>>> done this and are waiting for a response, please ping the thread.
>>>
>>> As always we need testers, so let me know if you want to help with
>>> testing.
>>>
>>
>> Update:
>>
>> I'm in the process of merging some last minute patches, so testing
will
>> be delayed until Tuesday (probably around 21:00 UTC).
>>
>
> LLVM 3.5.2-rc1 has been tagged and is ready for testing.  Just a
> reminder that we should be using llvm 3.5.1 as the reference for
> regression testing.
Looks good on Ubuntu 14.04:

Performance Regressions    99
Performance Improvements  146
Unchanged Tests           747
Total Tests               992

Uploaded clang+llvm-3.5.2-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz

Ben

ARM and AArch64 uploaded and good to go.

On 18 March 2015 at 05:27, Ben Pope <benpope81 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 11:13 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 01:51:32PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:04:35PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Just a reminder that testing for 3.5.2 will begin on Monday,
Mar 16.  If
>>>> you have any patches you want merged please send an email to
the
>>>> relevant commits list and cc me and the code owner.  If you
have already
>>>> done this and are waiting for a response, please ping the
thread.
>>>>
>>>> As always we need testers, so let me know if you want to help
with
>>>> testing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Update:
>>>
>>> I'm in the process of merging some last minute patches, so
testing will
>>> be delayed until Tuesday (probably around 21:00 UTC).
>>>
>>
>> LLVM 3.5.2-rc1 has been tagged and is ready for testing.  Just a
>> reminder that we should be using llvm 3.5.1 as the reference for
>> regression testing.
>
>
> Looks good on Ubuntu 14.04:
>
> Performance Regressions    99
> Performance Improvements  146
> Unchanged Tests           747
> Total Tests               992
>
> Uploaded clang+llvm-3.5.2-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-14.04.tar.xz
>
> Ben
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net>
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 01:51:32PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:04:35PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Just a reminder that testing for 3.5.2 will begin on Monday, Mar
16.  If
>> > you have any patches you want merged please send an email to the
>> > relevant commits list and cc me and the code owner.  If you have
already
>> > done this and are waiting for a response, please ping the thread.
>> >
>> > As always we need testers, so let me know if you want to help with
>> > testing.
>> >
>>
>> Update:
>>
>> I'm in the process of merging some last minute patches, so testing
will
>> be delayed until Tuesday (probably around 21:00 UTC).
>>
>
> LLVM 3.5.2-rc1 has been tagged and is ready for testing.  Just a
> reminder that we should be using llvm 3.5.1 as the reference for
> regression testing.
Uploaded Windows binary:
2d8bb64e9f86cd316f02cec1a8ff306e84a553a3  LLVM-3.5.2-rc1-win32.exe

Attaching the build script for posterity.

Thanks,
Hans
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: build_llvm_352._bat_
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 2380 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150318/3700563f/attachment.obj>

Hi,

uploaded OS X binaries to SFTP, looks good:

    MD5 (clang+llvm-3.5.2-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz) =
53f0eff1887167dd65d7abacf2c18644


Cheers,
Sebastian
> On 18.03.2015, at 04:13, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 01:51:32PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:04:35PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Just a reminder that testing for 3.5.2 will begin on Monday, Mar
16.  If
>>> you have any patches you want merged please send an email to the
>>> relevant commits list and cc me and the code owner.  If you have
already
>>> done this and are waiting for a response, please ping the thread.
>>> 
>>> As always we need testers, so let me know if you want to help with
>>> testing.
>>> 
>> 
>> Update:
>> 
>> I'm in the process of merging some last minute patches, so testing
will
>> be delayed until Tuesday (probably around 21:00 UTC).
>> 
> 
> LLVM 3.5.2-rc1 has been tagged and is ready for testing.  Just a
> reminder that we should be using llvm 3.5.1 as the reference for
> regression testing.
> 
> -Tom
> 
>> -Tom
>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tom
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu>       
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu <http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/>
>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
<http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu>        
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu <http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/>
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
<http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu>        
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu <http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/>
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
<http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150319/9667d9b2/attachment.html>

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:13:05PM -0400, Tom Stellard
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 01:51:32PM -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:04:35PM -0400, Tom Stellard wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > Just a reminder that testing for 3.5.2 will begin on Monday, Mar
16.  If
> > > you have any patches you want merged please send an email to the
> > > relevant commits list and cc me and the code owner.  If you have
already
> > > done this and are waiting for a response, please ping the thread.
> > > 
> > > As always we need testers, so let me know if you want to help
with
> > > testing.
> > > 
> > 
> > Update:
> > 
> > I'm in the process of merging some last minute patches, so testing
will
> > be delayed until Tuesday (probably around 21:00 UTC).
> > 
> 
> LLVM 3.5.2-rc1 has been tagged and is ready for testing.  Just a
> reminder that we should be using llvm 3.5.1 as the reference for
> regression testing.
> 
Hi,

In the past whenever a -rc was deemed ready for release, I just
dropped the -rc name from the binaries and used them as the release
binaries.  This was done to save the hassle of having testers regenerate
identical binaries using the -final tag.

I'm not sure if this is actually the right thing to do, because I
know there is a way to include the svn tag in the llvm version
string (I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm pretty sure I've seen
this before in bug reports).

How do the testers feel about re-building binaries from the -final
tag even with the source is identical to -rc*?  Is this something
we should be doing?

Thanks,
Tom
> -Tom
> 
> > -Tom
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Tom
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

On Friday, March 20, 2015 06:29 AM, Tom Stellard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the past whenever a -rc was deemed ready for release, I just
> dropped the -rc name from the binaries and used them as the release
> binaries.  This was done to save the hassle of having testers regenerate
> identical binaries using the -final tag.
>
> I'm not sure if this is actually the right thing to do, because I
> know there is a way to include the svn tag in the llvm version
> string (I'm not sure how to do this, but I'm pretty sure I've
seen
> this before in bug reports).
>
> How do the testers feel about re-building binaries from the -final
> tag even with the source is identical to -rc*?  Is this something
> we should be doing?
I have no idea how much use the binaries get... Previously when I 
compiled for Ubuntu x86_64, but required a newer version of libstdc++, 
it took a while for people to complain, and similarly, when I thought 
I'd built for 32bit, but was actually requiring 64bit, it took a while 
for complaints to come in.  I'd assume the latest Ubuntu LTS on x86 
hardware is a fairly popular platform as far as they go.  Having said 
that, perhaps there are alternative builds (e.g., on launchpad) that 
people prefer, that mean that my builds are used less than say, for some 
less popular platform where there are fewer choices of binary builds.

I have no issue recompiling for final, and would recommend it anyway, 
but then, a build is pretty quick and not disruptive on my platform. 
Perhaps doing an svn switch to the new tag would only require a small 
compilation and mostly linking.

Ben