search for: cfarm

On Mar 9, 2009, at 8:53 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > This nightly tester is now using an llvm-g++ that produces the new > ODR linkage > types. This means that many more functions are being considered by > the > inter-procedural optimization passes (for example, "linkonce" > functions defined > in a header). The result seems to be pretty huge swings (both good

Hi Chris, > Can you check to see if the stepanov_container/fftbench regressions > are real? If so, it would be very interesting to know what is "going > wrong" on them. I think these may not be real. This version of llvm-gcc was built with checking enabled - does this turn on checking in libstdc++? It seems that a bunch of linkonce libstdc++ checking code is now being

This nightly tester is now using an llvm-g++ that produces the new ODR linkage types. This means that many more functions are being considered by the inter-procedural optimization passes (for example, "linkonce" functions defined in a header). The result seems to be pretty huge swings (both good and bad) in the C++ tests in the testsuite, see below. Note that this tester is often

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > This change broke the gcc compile farm bots. On the compile farm, gcc is > normally around version 4.4. However, gcc 4.8.2 is available in the > non-default directory /opt/cfarm/gcc-latest/bin > > Maybe we can adapt the buildbots to find it there. > > @Duncan, do you have time to do so? > Just as an FYI, I saw this and chatted with Duncan tonight about fixing. He's looking into it, but may need to delegate it to others. -------------- next part --------...

Hi all, One of my commit broke the PowerPC builder, so I reverted it. The issue could be reproduced only for big-endian, little-endian ppc64 built ok. How can I fix it? I have no access to any PowerPC box to get to the bottom of issue. All the other tests are ok. Commit: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/9c20156de39b377190d7a91783d61877b303fe35, svn revision: 359870. Reproduced

Greetings, starting a new thread and CC-ing all the folks I could think of that are likely running bots for LLVM. If I've missed any, sorry, please add them. As lots of folks have been mentioning, it's time to switch LLVM (and most subprojects) to use C++11. The first step is establishing a new baseline of compiler versions that are supported[1]: MSVC 2012 GCC 4.7 Clang 3.1 If you are

On Mar 19, 2008, at 1:39 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > I would like to see: > > (1) LLVM testsuite run every night for all targets, target variants > and > operating systems, for example by using an emulator to emulate targets > for which the hardware is not available. The gcc project has a > compile > farm which might be usable for this, but we would need to ask them

LLVM ARM v6 backend is in fairly good shape. Even the JIT passes nearly the entire llvm test suite. There are some known missing bits: 1. Exception handling 2. Atomic Not sure: 3. Debugging support (should be trivial to hook up if it's not done) Also the thumb backend is not awesome. Its performance is not great. Evan On Apr 1, 2009, at 6:34 AM, Robert Schuster wrote: > Hi, > the

Hi, the ARM backend lacks some stuff like support for atomic intrinsics. I learned the hard way (crash). Lately I was told that the ARM backend of LLVM is generally in its early stages of development. I would like to know more about this. Which stuff is missing, known to be unstable and the like. Thanks in advance for taking the time. Regards Robert -------------- next part -------------- A

...llvm-test/fail/ExecutionEngine200904/segfault# llvm-as < 2003-05-07-ArgumentTest.ll | lli - test Tried to execute an unknown external function: i32 (i8*)* puts Stack dump: 0. Program arguments: lli - test Aborted The unexpected tests that i have been investigation where those produced by the cfarm-arm nightly tester on 090321. I have uploaded a pdf of the testresult for future reference: http://labb.zafena.se/shark-testing/llvmTestLogs/arm090321.pdf Cheers and have a great day! Xerxes Evan Cheng skrev: > LLVM ARM v6 backend is in fairly good shape. Even the JIT passes > nearly the...