search for: rajav

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Raja Venkateswaran <rajav at codeaurora.org> wrote: > I think we need a group of maintainers rather than a single maintainer given > the spectrum of ARM targets/ISAs/platforms required to support There have been a plethora of ARM Instruction Set Architecture variants over the years. Which ones do we expect LLVM t...

...en ARM bugs must be fixed/addressed (at least analyzed if cannot be fixed) by release time, it will go a long way in ensuring high quality releases for ARM --Raja From: Joe Abbey [mailto:jabbey at arxan.com] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 10:01 AM To: Renato Golin Cc: Anton Korobeynikov; rajav at codeaurora.org; James Molloy; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer Admittedly we're very interested in becoming ARM backend maintainers as our product heavily relies on LLVM. However, we don't have testing resources to test both our product and...

...ssed (at least analyzed if cannot be fixed) by release time, it will go a long way in ensuring high quality releases for ARM > > --Raja > > From: Joe Abbey [mailto:jabbey at arxan.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 10:01 AM > To: Renato Golin > Cc: Anton Korobeynikov; rajav at codeaurora.org; James Molloy; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer > > Admittedly we're very interested in becoming ARM backend maintainers as our product heavily relies on LLVM. > > However, we don't have testing resources to test...

...all open ARM bugs must be fixed/addressed (at least analyzed if cannot be fixed) by release time, it will go a long way in ensuring high quality releases for ARM --Raja From: Joe Abbey [mailto:jabbey at arxan.com] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 10:01 AM To: Renato Golin Cc: Anton Korobeynikov; rajav at codeaurora.org<mailto:rajav at codeaurora.org>; James Molloy; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer Admittedly we're very interested in becoming ARM backend maintainers as our product heavily relies on LLVM. Howe...

...oment for helping "maintain" the ARM backend. Evan is the code owner who approves all changes of course. Thanks, Tanya > --Raja > > From: Joe Abbey [mailto:jabbey at arxan.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 10:01 AM > To: Renato Golin > Cc: Anton Korobeynikov; rajav at codeaurora.org; James Molloy; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer > > Admittedly we're very interested in becoming ARM backend maintainers as our product heavily relies on LLVM. > > However, we don't have testing resources to test...

...fferent on arm-darwin. Other areas of ARM work probably aren't as likely to need to test on arm-darwin outside of Apple. deep On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Don Quixote de la Mancha <quixote at dulcineatech.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Raja Venkateswaran > <rajav at codeaurora.org> wrote: >> I think we need a group of maintainers rather than a single maintainer given >> the spectrum of ARM targets/ISAs/platforms required to support > > There have been a plethora of ARM Instruction Set Architecture > variants over the years.  Which on...

Admittedly we're very interested in becoming ARM backend maintainers as our product heavily relies on LLVM. However, we don't have testing resources to test both our product and LLVM on a host of target boards. We have some chumbys, beagleboards, iPhones, iPod Touches, tables, Android Phones, etc. And most of those are already booked solid with our own regression tests (most of which

...re (for debugging) raises firewall and security issues. I would like to hear community's thoughts on these. Thanks --Raja > -----Original Message----- > From: David A. Greene [mailto:greened at obbligato.org] > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 2:43 PM > To: Bill Wendling > Cc: rajav at codeaurora.org; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] ARM Qualification > > Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> writes: > > > Improving the test suite is always welcome. > > Do we have an idea of what sorts of improvements we'd like? Any codes &g...

...ery night on it (as well as PlumHall, EEMBC and SpecInt). Unfortunately it's not exactly software we can give away or give access to. ________________________________________ From: Don Quixote de la Mancha [quixote at dulcineatech.com] Sent: 13 October 2011 18:47 To: Joe Abbey Cc: Renato Golin; rajav at codeaurora.org; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; James Molloy Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Joe Abbey <jabbey at arxan.com> wrote: > However, we don't have testing resources to test both our product and LLVM > on a host of target boar...

...C and SpecInt). Unfortunately it's not exactly software we can give away or give access to. ________________________________________ From: Don Quixote de la Mancha [quixote at dulcineatech.com<mailto:quixote at dulcineatech.com>] Sent: 13 October 2011 18:47 To: Joe Abbey Cc: Renato Golin; rajav at codeaurora.org<mailto:rajav at codeaurora.org>; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>; James Molloy Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Joe Abbey <jabbey at arxan.com<mailto:jabbey at arxan.com>> wrote: Howe...

...e general than just ARM, we could discuss the release criteria for ARM targets as part of that BoF. Thanks -Anshu *From:*llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] *On Behalf Of *Kristof Beyls *Sent:* Monday, October 17, 2011 6:31 AM *To:* 'Tanya Lattner'; rajav at codeaurora.org *Cc:* James Molloy; 'Joe Abbey'; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu *Subject:* Re: [LLVMdev] LLC ARM Backend maintainer I agree with the remarks made by Tanya. Our team plans to actively help fix release blocker bugs for ARM targets. However, clear release criteria need to be defin...

"Raja Venkateswaran" <rajav at codeaurora.org> writes: > I think we need to think along two dimensions - Breadth of testing and depth > of testing > > 1. Breadth: What the best supported ARM ISA versions in LLVM ARM? Say its > armv6 and armv7; We need to > - regression test ARM mode, Thumb-2 and Thumb-...

Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> writes: > Improving the test suite is always welcome. Do we have an idea of what sorts of improvements we'd like? Any codes that we want to add, for example? What would be useful for ARM? > In addition, we send out pre-release tarballs and have people in the > community build and test their programs with it. This is not a perfect >

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Joe Abbey <jabbey at arxan.com> wrote: > However, we don't have testing resources to test both our product and LLVM > on a host of target boards.  We have some chumbys, beagleboards, iPhones, > iPod Touches, tables, Android Phones, etc.  And most of those are already > booked solid with our own regression tests (most of which are based on

Hi Raja, I'm open to suggestions. Our current release qualification is to bootstrap the compiler (similar to how GCC does their bootstrapping), run the test suites, and verify that there are no regressions. Improving the test suite is always welcome. In addition, we send out pre-release tarballs and have people in the community build and test their programs with it. This is not a perfect

Hi Gerolf, Sorry for the delayed response. I had to get permission to share more details. I am allowed to share relative numbers but not absolute numbers. Any missing test is due to runtime failures (e.g., gcc failure due to the fused multiply pattern bug which Tim fixed later on). Thanks, Ana. Benchmarks ARM64 vs GCC 4.9 % ARM64 vs AArch64 % ARM64 vs AArch64 patched %

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

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 test 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