Tobias Hieta via llvm-dev
2020-Dec-01 18:49 UTC
[llvm-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged
Thats a very good point. Maybe someone with an M1 machine can take on the task of testing releases on those? I would happily do that but I don't have such a machine and can't afford one right now unfortunately. -- Tobias On Tue, Dec 1, 2020, 19:21 Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote:> Hmm, but unless you're doing this on an arm64 machine, you won't be > able to run the tests in Phase2 and 3? > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:36 PM Tobias Hieta <tobias at plexapp.com> wrote: > > > > Yeah you can pass -DCMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES=arm64;x86_64 and it will > > make fat binaries. > > > > But it seems like we should probably do two packages. That probably > > needs to be implemented in the test-release in the following way: > > > > Build Phase1 for the host currently running on. Then build Phase2 and > > 3 for the target (arm64) and compare those. > > > > Anything I am not thinking about here or missing? > > > > -- Tobias > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:32 PM Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > I think the separate packages make the most sense. > > > > > > Also, how would one practically go about doing the fat binary > > > approach? Is there some cmake magic that would make it > > > straight-forward? > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:13 PM Tobias Hieta via Release-testers > > > <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > I just realized that we should probably make an arm64 build as well > > > > for those new fancy mac's. > > > > > > > > What do people think is the best solution here, a fat universal build > > > > that will be double the size (currently llvm+clang is already ~400MB > > > > packed so it will be very big), or two separate builds? > > > > > > > > The pro of having two separate builds is that we can set the correct > > > > default triple instead of a single one, the downside is that I need > to > > > > build it twice for every version. > > > > > > > > -- Tobias > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:03 PM Tobias Hieta <tobias at plexapp.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Tom, > > > > > > > > > > MacOS build: clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz > > > > > with SHA256: > c9ee87d7e42df8494a9f42993ed499479b3ce118c940a6e8907d075ceb913223 > > > > > is uploaded. > > > > > > > > > > The same tests as before failed: > > > > > > > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: libunwind_01.pass.cpp (69255 of 69302) > > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: signal_frame.pass.cpp (69258 of 69302) > > > > > > > > > > I had to use the following patch to use Python 3: > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg > b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg > > > > > index 357b18a205d..96c0c3a1da7 100644 > > > > > --- a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg > > > > > +++ b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg > > > > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ if config.operating_system == 'Darwin': > > > > > cmd = subprocess.Popen(['xcrun', '--show-sdk-path'], > > > > > stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) > > > > > out, err = cmd.communicate() > > > > > - out = out.strip() > > > > > + out = out.strip().decode() > > > > > res = cmd.wait() > > > > > if res == 0 and out: > > > > > config.test_flags += " -isysroot " + out > > > > > > > > > > otherwise tests failed to run. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers > > > > > <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1. Testers may begin testing and > uploading > > > > > > binaries. If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, > you > > > > > > have until Dec. 8 to request backports. You can make these > requests by > > > > > > filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the > 'blocks' > > > > > > field. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Tom > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Release-testers mailing list > > > > > > Release-testers at lists.llvm.org > > > > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Release-testers mailing list > > > > Release-testers at lists.llvm.org > > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20201201/b911e2e6/attachment.html>
Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev
2020-Dec-01 19:15 UTC
[llvm-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged
Nico has an M1 and I think he looked at building LLVM on it too. Perhaps he can help out. On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 7:49 PM Tobias Hieta <tobias at plexapp.com> wrote:> > Thats a very good point. > > Maybe someone with an M1 machine can take on the task of testing releases on those? I would happily do that but I don't have such a machine and can't afford one right now unfortunately. > > -- Tobias > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020, 19:21 Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> >> Hmm, but unless you're doing this on an arm64 machine, you won't be >> able to run the tests in Phase2 and 3? >> >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:36 PM Tobias Hieta <tobias at plexapp.com> wrote: >> > >> > Yeah you can pass -DCMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES=arm64;x86_64 and it will >> > make fat binaries. >> > >> > But it seems like we should probably do two packages. That probably >> > needs to be implemented in the test-release in the following way: >> > >> > Build Phase1 for the host currently running on. Then build Phase2 and >> > 3 for the target (arm64) and compare those. >> > >> > Anything I am not thinking about here or missing? >> > >> > -- Tobias >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:32 PM Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> > > >> > > I think the separate packages make the most sense. >> > > >> > > Also, how would one practically go about doing the fat binary >> > > approach? Is there some cmake magic that would make it >> > > straight-forward? >> > > >> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:13 PM Tobias Hieta via Release-testers >> > > <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > I just realized that we should probably make an arm64 build as well >> > > > for those new fancy mac's. >> > > > >> > > > What do people think is the best solution here, a fat universal build >> > > > that will be double the size (currently llvm+clang is already ~400MB >> > > > packed so it will be very big), or two separate builds? >> > > > >> > > > The pro of having two separate builds is that we can set the correct >> > > > default triple instead of a single one, the downside is that I need to >> > > > build it twice for every version. >> > > > >> > > > -- Tobias >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:03 PM Tobias Hieta <tobias at plexapp.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Tom, >> > > > > >> > > > > MacOS build: clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz >> > > > > with SHA256: c9ee87d7e42df8494a9f42993ed499479b3ce118c940a6e8907d075ceb913223 >> > > > > is uploaded. >> > > > > >> > > > > The same tests as before failed: >> > > > > >> > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: libunwind_01.pass.cpp (69255 of 69302) >> > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: signal_frame.pass.cpp (69258 of 69302) >> > > > > >> > > > > I had to use the following patch to use Python 3: >> > > > > >> > > > > diff --git a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg >> > > > > index 357b18a205d..96c0c3a1da7 100644 >> > > > > --- a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg >> > > > > +++ b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg >> > > > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ if config.operating_system == 'Darwin': >> > > > > cmd = subprocess.Popen(['xcrun', '--show-sdk-path'], >> > > > > stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) >> > > > > out, err = cmd.communicate() >> > > > > - out = out.strip() >> > > > > + out = out.strip().decode() >> > > > > res = cmd.wait() >> > > > > if res == 0 and out: >> > > > > config.test_flags += " -isysroot " + out >> > > > > >> > > > > otherwise tests failed to run. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers >> > > > > <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1. Testers may begin testing and uploading >> > > > > > binaries. If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you >> > > > > > have until Dec. 8 to request backports. You can make these requests by >> > > > > > filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks' >> > > > > > field. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > -Tom >> > > > > > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > > Release-testers mailing list >> > > > > > Release-testers at lists.llvm.org >> > > > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Release-testers mailing list >> > > > Release-testers at lists.llvm.org >> > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers