search for: nottest

Displaying 15 results from an estimated 15 matches for "nottest".

Did you mean: hottest
2014 May 04
12
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Benchmarking subset of the test suite
...leSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-ArgumentTest SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-CastTest SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-CastTest1 SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-CastTest2 SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-CastTest3 SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-ManyArguments SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03-NotTest SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-08-02-CastTest SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-08-02-CastTest2 SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-08-19-CodegenBug SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-10-09-ArrayResolution SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-10-12-StructureArgs SingleSource/UnitTests/2002...
2012 Feb 19
2
[LLVMdev] Problem While Running Test Suite
...ce/UnitTests/blockstret | * | * | SingleSource/UnitTests/conditional-gnu-ext | * | * | SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-08-02-CastTest | * | * | SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03-NotTest | * | * | SingleSource/UnitTests/2005-05-11-Popcount-ffs-fls | * | * | SingleSource/UnitTests/2009-12-07-StructReturn | * | * | SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-12-13-MishaTest...
2008 Feb 03
0
[LLVMdev] 2.2 Prerelease available for testing
...* 0.01 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-ManyArguments | 0.0026 660 0.0026 * 0.0023 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.01 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03-NotTest | 0.0039 624 0.0023 * 0.0023 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.00 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest | 0.0038 720 0.0043 * 0.0041...
2007 Sep 18
0
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
...* 0.01 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-ManyArguments | 0.0000 660 0.0040 * 0.0000 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.02 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03-NotTest | 0.0040 620 0.0040 * 0.0040 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.01 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest | 0.0000 700 0.0040 * 0.0000...
2008 Jan 24
6
[LLVMdev] 2.2 Prerelease available for testing
LLVMers, The 2.2 prerelease is now available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.2/ If anyone can help test this release, I ask that you do the following: 1) Build llvm and llvm-gcc (or use a binary). You may build release (default) or debug. You may pick llvm-gcc-4.0, llvm-gcc-4.2, or both. 2) Run 'make check'. 3) In llvm-test, run 'make TEST=nightly report'. 4) When
2007 Sep 18
0
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
...* 0.01 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-ManyArguments | 0.0028 656 0.0021 * 0.0021 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.01 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03-NotTest | 0.0067 616 0.0019 * 0.0018 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.01 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest | 0.0063 712 0.0032 * 0.0032...
2008 Jan 28
0
[LLVMdev] 2.2 Prerelease available for testing
...* 0.00 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-ManyArguments | 0.0012 680 0.0015 * 0.0014 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.00 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03-NotTest | 0.0020 648 0.0014 * 0.0014 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * 0.00 | - - n/a n/a SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest | 0.0015 756 0.0026 * 0.0026...
2009 Oct 20
1
[LLVMdev] 2.6 pre-release2 ready for testing
...01 | -       -       n/a          n/a > SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02-ManyArguments                          | > 0.0000 696      0.0000      *                0.0100      |    0.00    0.00 >  0.00 *           0.01 | -       -       n/a          n/a > SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03-NotTest                                | > 0.0000 664      0.0000      *                0.0000      |    0.00    0.00 >  0.00 *           0.01 | -       -       n/a          n/a > SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest                                | > 0.0100 688      0.0000      *        ...
2009 Oct 20
0
[LLVMdev] 2.6 pre-release2 ready for testing
Hi Tanya, > 1) Compile llvm from source and untar the llvm-test in the projects > directory (name it llvm-test or test-suite). Choose to use a > pre-compiled llvm-gcc or re-compile it yourself. I compiled llvm and llvm-gcc with separate objects directories. Platform is x86_64-linux-gnu. > 2) Run make check, report any failures (FAIL or unexpected pass). Note > that you need to
2009 Oct 20
1
[LLVMdev] 2.6 pre-release2 ready for testing
...n/a n/a > SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-02- > ManyArguments | 0.0000 696 0.0000 > * 0.0100 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * > 0.01 | - - n/a n/a > SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-03- > NotTest | 0.0000 664 0.0000 > * 0.0000 | 0.00 0.00 0.00 * > 0.01 | - - n/a n/a > SingleSource/UnitTests/2002-05-19- > DivTest | 0.0100 688 0.0000...
2007 Sep 15
22
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
LLVMers, The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ I'm looking for members of the LLVM community to test the 2.1 release. There are 2 ways you can help: 1) Download llvm-2.1, llvm-test-2.1, and the appropriate llvm-gcc4.0 binary. Run "make check" and the full llvm-test suite (make TEST=nightly report). 2) Download
2009 Oct 17
12
[LLVMdev] 2.6 pre-release2 ready for testing
LLVMers, 2.6 pre-release2 is ready to be tested by the community. http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.6/ If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release. To test llvm-gcc: 1) Compile llvm from source and untar the llvm-test in the projects directory (name it llvm-test or test-suite). Choose to use a pre- compiled llvm-gcc or re-compile it yourself. 2) Run make check,
2009 Feb 07
11
[LLVMdev] 2.5 Pre-release1 available for testing
LLVMers, The 2.5 pre-release is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/ If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release. Please do the following: 1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or use llvm-gcc binary (please compile llvm-gcc with fortran if you can). 2) Run make check, send me the testrun.log 3) Run "make
2014 Jan 28
3
[LLVMdev] MergeFunctions: reduce complexity to O(log(N))
Hi Stepan, Sorry for the delay. It's great that you are working on MergeFunctions as well and I agree, we should definitely try to combine our efforts to improve MergeFunctions. Just to give you some context, the pass (with the similar function merging patch) is already being used in a production setting. From my point of view, it would be better if we focus on improving its capability
2014 Jan 30
3
[LLVMdev] MergeFunctions: reduce complexity to O(log(N))
...01 3155 2002-05-02-CastTest1.ll 1 2121 0 0.01 2112 0 0.01 2112 2002-05-02-CastTest2.ll 2 3803 0 0.01 3794 0 0.01 3794 2002-05-02-CastTest3.ll 1 2938 0 0.01 2929 0 0.01 2929 2002-05-02-CastTest.ll 2 11291 0 0.01 11282 0 0.01 11282 2002-05-02-ManyArguments.ll 2 4222 0 0.01 4213 0 0.01 4213 2002-05-03-NotTest.ll 3 6111 0 0.01 6102 0 0.01 6102 2002-05-19-DivTest.ll 3 3553 0 0.01 3544 0 0.01 3544 2002-08-02-CastTest2.ll 2 2144 0 0.01 2135 0 0.01 2135 2002-08-02-CastTest.ll 2 1777 0 0.01 1768 0 0.01 1768 2002-08-19-CodegenBug.ll 1 2750 0 0.01 2741 0 0.01 2741 2002-10-09-ArrayResolution.ll 1 2442 0 0.01 243...