search for: check_cfc

...real code people actually write, and > the latter can generate a large amount of complex code without any external > dependencies (so it's easy to build). > > A few other things to note: There's a tool in clang here ( https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/master/clang/utils/check_cfc ) called check_cfc which uses the same basic idea as the script above. It's designed to transparently wrap clang invocations so that any differences in codegen will actually trigger a build failure. There are a few more details in these slides ( https://llvm.org/devmtg/2015-04/slides/Verifyin...

Dear all, My name is Mohamed and I am a first year computer science masters student. I am writing this email because I am interested in the project idea "Debug Info Should have no effect on codegen". So far I have built llvm and clang and I was trying to reproduce the problem on simple c++ programs but I can't. Being specific this are the steps I am doing: $ clang -g test.cc > $

How much of a priority is it to find codegen changes triggered by flags such as -g? As long as the effects are reliable between runs this shoud be really easy to attack using C-Reduce. I can look into it if this is important. John On 7/6/17 11:12 AM, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev wrote: >> Out of curiosity >> what kinds of changes arise from the presence/absence of -g? (It's

Hi Paul, Thanks for your useful guidelines, may I confirm with you the steps list below is correct or not? 1. find sample code (.c) 2. using different options(pass) to compile sample code by clang with/without "-g" 3. objdump the output.o and outout-g.o 4. compare two file of text section check if there has any difference. 5. if find difference, great, file bug and fix it. Please

Hi, What is the guarantee that the codegen is same across Release and Release+Asserts build (except the known differences)? I assume there is no guarantee and it is possible to drop a bug like this. Personally I feel it is very expensive to debug and it depends on each scenario. Most of the bots test the Release+Asserts mode and any thoughts on how we can catch this sort of a problem

> On 2016-Nov-15, at 15:16, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mandeep Singh via llvm-dev Grang" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org, "mehdi amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com>, dexonsmith at apple.com, zinob at codeaurora.org >> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016

In theory, compiler should generate bit-identical code with and without debug info. I.e. # clang -c -O2 -g a.cc -o a.g.o # clang -c -O2 -g0 a.cc -o a.g0.o # strip a.g.o a.g0.o # diff a.g.o a.g0.o The diff should find two binaries identical. For brevity, in the rest of the mail, I'll refer to this requirement as "codegen consistency" (any better name?) Unfortunately, LLVM does not