search for: dblaiki

...or long-lasting failures? > I'm not sure what the generic setup is, but at least for the builder/slave I admin, it emails me on every failure. So I get a lot of mail, continuously, if there's a consistent failure. - Dave > ------------------------------ > *From:* David Blaikie [dblaikie at gmail.com] > *Sent:* 01 October 2015 18:55 > *To:* llvm-dev; Daniel Sanders > *Subject:* Fwd: buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-cmake-mips > > This buildbot has been failing for over a week straight ( > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-mips/builds/9387 ) - does &g...

...t sure what the generic setup is, but at least for the builder/slave > I admin, it emails me on every failure. So I get a lot of mail, continuously, > if there's a consistent failure. Ok, I'll see if I can get mine to do the same. ________________________________ From: David Blaikie [dblaikie at gmail.com] Sent: 01 October 2015 20:19 To: Daniel Sanders Cc: llvm-dev Subject: Re: buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-cmake-mips On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com<mailto:Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com>> wrote: I do. I'll take a look....

...From: <llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org> Date: Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:49 PM Subject: buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-cmake-mips To: Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com>, Ahmed Bougacha < ahmed.bougacha at gmail.com>, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com>, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>, Davide Italiano <davide at freebsd.org>, Dehao Chen < dehao at google.com> Cc: gkistanova at gmail.com The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder clang-cmake-mips while building llvm. Full details are available at: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cm...

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:26 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >&...

...smart pointer... But I'm happy to hold off on that a while longer if we're going to make a concerted effort to avoid propagating these half-baked solutions and actually try to remove them when we come up against problems with/around them. On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 1:01 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > & repeating for the benefit of cfe-dev, here's the list of known cases of > conditional ownership (I'm sure there are others that don't fit the exact > naming convention I grep'd for): > > In Clang, simply grepping for "Owns"...

Yeah, fair - I'll give it a week or something, see if Paul or anyone else has ideas about why the existing behavior might be useful before I remove it. On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 10:27 AM Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 28, 2018, at 9:50 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > a) decide that a unit without ranges covers no ranges - and don't do the >> search >> >> Are there compilers that do this ("forget" to emit ranges) that we care >> to support with llvm-symbolizer? >> > >...

...f Version", 3); M.addModuleFlag(llvm::Module::Error, "Debug Info Version", llvm::DEBUG_METADATA_VERSION); llvm-dwarfdump and addr2line now point at a line in .ll files, not the source files. Thanks! /Muneeb On 15 Oct 2014, at 18:22, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > (similarly for the dwarf version flag) > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:22 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > I have no experience with deb...

...for the builder/slave >> I admin, it emails me on every failure. So I get a lot of mail, >> continuously, >> if there's a consistent failure. > > Ok, I'll see if I can get mine to do the same. > > ________________________________ > > From: David Blaikie [dblaikie at gmail.com] > Sent: 01 October 2015 20:19 > To: Daniel Sanders > Cc: llvm-dev > Subject: Re: buildbot failure in LLVM on clang-cmake-mips > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> > wrote: > > I do. I...

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote: > > On May 9, 2016, at 4:42 PM, Peter Collingbourne via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:26 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> >>> wrote:...

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:45 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:26 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On M...

I have just tried a Release build of LLVM but with LIBOMPTARGET_ENABLE_DEBUG enabled. The app build became super fast, but I can not obtain debugging information that I need at runtime. On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 5:03 David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm still confused by that - whether or not the LLVM you built has debug > info in it shouldn't at all change what goes into the binaries that LLVM > produces (modulo a few bugs, but nothing that'd produce drastic performance > swings). You mentio...

...properly-titled thread on llvm-dev would be the > right way to decide this. > > --paulr > > > > *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *Nico > Weber via llvm-dev > *Sent:* Thursday, September 3, 2020 4:16 PM > *To:* David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> > *Cc:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; LLVM on Power < > powerllvm at ca.ibm.com>; Nemanja Ivanovic <nemanjai at ca.ibm.com> > *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Flakey failure on clang-ppc64le-linux-multistage > > > > https://llvm.org/docs/Co...

...O? > Thanks for all the work to support this feature! > --paulr > > From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>> On Behalf Of Vedant Kumar via llvm-dev > Sent: Friday, February 7, 2020 2:04 PM > To: David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com <mailto:dblaikie at gmail.com>> > Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; nikola.prica at rt-rk.com <mailto:nikola.prica at rt-rk.com>; ibaev at cisco.com <mailto:ibaev at cisco.com>; asowda at cisco.com <mailto:asowda at ci...

Input to this pass is the bitcode format of simple code below : int sum_single_loop (int a){ int su = 0, i; for (i=0;i<a;i++) su = su + i; return su; } On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 2:32 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Pranav Kant <pranav913 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> So, you mean to say that the above implementation is correct and should >> work fine. >> > > So far as I can see - but I could be missing somet...

...ed to work.  I will comment on the review. > > --paulr > >   > > *From:* vsk at apple.com <vsk at apple.com> *On Behalf Of * Vedant Kumar > *Sent:* Friday, February 7, 2020 3:26 PM > *To:* Robinson, Paul <paul.robinson at sony.com> > *Cc:* David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>; nikola.prica at rt-rk.com; ibaev at cisco.com; asowda at cisco.com; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > *Subject:* Re: [llvm-dev] Enabling debug entry value production by default > >   > > The actual DWARF emission for call site parameters is gated inside of DwarfDebug:...

It seems a little strange conceptually that object depends on BitcodeReader. Is it possible to break that dependency? On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:11 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 4:52 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 12:55 PM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:31 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail....

...s are available at: > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux/builds/17810 > > Buildbot URL: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/ > > Buildslave for this Build: sanitizer-buildbot1 > > Build Reason: scheduler > Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] 236801 > Blamelist: dblaikie,echristo,samsonov > > BUILD FAILED: failed annotate failed run sanitizer tests in gcc build > > sincerely, > -The Buildbot > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20...

https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/lit.html already lists %T as "parent directory of %t (not unique, deprecated, do not use)". See also https://reviews.llvm.org/D35396 On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 3:37 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I think I'd be up for considering deprecation of %T due to the risk > of race conditions/conflicts between tests. %t gives a unique name you can > do whatever you want with - only need one file, use %t as a file, need a > directory full of files, mk...

...---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org> Date: Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:34 PM Subject: buildbot failure in LLVM on llvm-mips-linux To: Ahmed Bougacha <ahmed.bougacha at gmail.com>, Chad Rosier < mcrosier at codeaurora.org>, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>, Davide Italiano <davide at freebsd.org>, Dehao Chen <dehao at google.com>, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com>, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com>, Michael Zolotukhin <mzolotukhin at apple.com>, R...

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 26 August 2015 at 17:39, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > *shrug* I haven't looked at whatever specific bots are under discussion, > but > > I really wouldn't mind/would like if the bots had a more "revert to > green" > > feel to them just like we have for commits: take a bot offline,...