search for: pr11107

...lated features (in general, e.g. platforms, cores, modes, etc.) we consider "release important" 2. We should define the conditions how the features in 1. should be tested 3. Someone should perform such testing for each release, provide help with reproduction of the problems (consider e.g. PR11107, w/o Bill's help it would be extremely hard to reproduce the problem, since it manifests only on arm/darwin). Any volunteers? :) -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

...eneral, e.g. > platforms, cores, modes, etc.) we consider "release important" > 2. We should define the conditions how the features in 1. should be tested > 3. Someone should perform such testing for each release, provide help > with reproduction of the problems (consider e.g. PR11107, w/o Bill's > help it would be extremely hard to reproduce the problem, since it > manifests only on arm/darwin). 4. We should be able to guarantee that release-blocking bugs on ARM targets will be fixed (if technically possible) before the actual release. There is no point in define AR...

...eneral, e.g. > platforms, cores, modes, etc.) we consider "release important" > 2. We should define the conditions how the features in 1. should be tested > 3. Someone should perform such testing for each release, provide help > with reproduction of the problems (consider e.g. PR11107, w/o Bill's > help it would be extremely hard to reproduce the problem, since it > manifests only on arm/darwin). > > 4. We should be able to guarantee that release-blocking bugs on ARM > targets will be fixed (if technically possible) before the actual > release. > >...

...d features (in general, e.g. platforms, cores, modes, etc.) we consider "release important" 2. We should define the conditions how the features in 1. should be tested 3. Someone should perform such testing for each release, provide help with reproduction of the problems (consider e.g. PR11107, w/o Bill's help it would be extremely hard to reproduce the problem, since it manifests only on arm/darwin). 4. We should be able to guarantee that release-blocking bugs on ARM targets will be fixed (if technically possible) before the actual release. There is no point in define ARM as a...

...lated features (in general, e.g. platforms, cores, modes, etc.) we consider "release important" 2. We should define the conditions how the features in 1. should be tested 3. Someone should perform such testing for each release, provide help with reproduction of the problems (consider e.g. PR11107, w/o Bill's help it would be extremely hard to reproduce the problem, since it manifests only on arm/darwin). 4. We should be able to guarantee that release-blocking bugs on ARM targets will be fixed (if technically possible) before the actual release. There is no point in define ARM as a rel...

...lated features (in general, e.g. platforms, cores, modes, etc.) we consider "release important" 2. We should define the conditions how the features in 1. should be tested 3. Someone should perform such testing for each release, provide help with reproduction of the problems (consider e.g. PR11107, w/o Bill's help it would be extremely hard to reproduce the problem, since it manifests only on arm/darwin). 4. We should be able to guarantee that release-blocking bugs on ARM targets will be fixed (if technically possible) before the actual release. There is no point in define ARM as a rel...

...eneral, e.g. > platforms, cores, modes, etc.) we consider "release important" > 2. We should define the conditions how the features in 1. should be tested > 3. Someone should perform such testing for each release, provide help > with reproduction of the problems (consider e.g. PR11107, w/o Bill's > help it would be extremely hard to reproduce the problem, since it > manifests only on arm/darwin). > > 4. We should be able to guarantee that release-blocking bugs on ARM > targets will be fixed (if technically possible) before the actual > release. > >...

Hi, It goes without saying that I +1 this. Cheers, James -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Raja Venkateswaran Sent: 11 October 2011 17:46 To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer I am very interested in seeing a qualification plan for ARM given that it is a widely used

I am very interested in seeing a qualification plan for ARM given that it is a widely used target with several combinations of options/modes to be tested. I & my team use ARM hardware for running tests and we run all LLVM test suite tests as part of qualification process. I had started a similar conversation in llvm-commits, but this is probably the right forum. It will save everyone a lot of