search for: release_600

Hi folks, I recently started getting errors when I fetch from the github monorepo ( https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507). They look like this: $ git fetch error: cannot lock ref 'refs/tags/release_600': there is a non-empty directory '.git/refs/tags/release_600' blocking reference 'refs/tags/release_600' >From github.com:llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507 ! [new tag] release_600 -> release_600 (unable to update local ref) It seems there is a conflic...

...; updates) will all use __x86_indirect_thunk_r11 we presumably want to > patch r324449 into the 6.0.0 in our tree. Dimitry points out it did get merged (r325082), so I must have been testing a version of 6.0.0 before the final release. Testing again now, with: FreeBSD clang version 6.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_600/final 326565) (based on LLVM 6.0.0) confirms it emits calls to __x86_indirect_thunk_r11; sorry for the false alarm.

...e -S -o fannkuch7.ll -emit-llvm fannkuch7.c $ opt -S -o fannkuch7.ll -early-cse-memssa -early-cse-memssa fannkuch7.ll Questions: Is it illegal to call -early-cse-memssa twice? Are there any other incompatible optimization orders? Best, HwJ --- $ clang --version > clang version 6.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_600/final) > Target: x86_64-apple-darwin16.5.0 > Thread model: posix > InstalledDir: /usr/local/bin Output: > 0 opt 0x000000010d8980e7 > llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(llvm::raw_ostream&) + 37 > 1 opt 0x000000010d8975ea > llvm::sys::Run...

...--system-libs` -g warning: unknown warning option '-Wno-maybe-uninitialized'; did you mean '-Wno-uninitialized'? [-Wunknown-warning-option] 1 warning generated. ➜ test git:(develop) ✗ ./reader 16 Function: ➜ test git:(develop) ✗ clang --version clang version 6.0.0-1ubuntu2 (tags/RELEASE_600/final) Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Thread model: posix InstalledDir: /usr/bin As you can see, I basically cannot get anything meaningful here. Could anyone shed some light on this? Thanks a lot. Irene -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://list...

...ne asm>:2:18: error: cannot use more than one symbol in memory operand mov ebx, offset bar I attached my source file and my modified .ll file. I compiled the source file with clang -m32 a.c -ffreestanding -nostdlib -S -emit-llvm $ clang --version clang version 6.0.0-1ubuntu2 (tags/RELEASE_600/final) Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Thread model: posix InstalledDir: /usr/bin Is this an LLVM bug or am I misusing inteldialect? Thank you, Steve -- Stephen Checkoway -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: a.c Type: application/octet-stream Size:...

...than one symbol in memory operand > mov ebx, offset bar > > I attached my source file and my modified .ll file. I compiled the source file with > > clang -m32 a.c -ffreestanding -nostdlib -S -emit-llvm > > $ clang --version > clang version 6.0.0-1ubuntu2 (tags/RELEASE_600/final) > Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu > Thread model: posix > InstalledDir: /usr/bin > > Is this an LLVM bug or am I misusing inteldialect? > > Thank you, > > Steve > > -- > Stephen Checkoway > > > > > ______________________________________...

...terPass<test::TestPass> X("testPass", "test pass", false /* Only looks at CFG */, false /* Analysis Pass */); } the rest of the file is more or less straight out of the Hello example. I'm working with this llvm version http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/tags/RELEASE_600/final I'd appreciate any help on this issue. Viktor

...86-64" "target-features"="+fxsr,+mmx,+sse,+sse2,+x87" "unsafe-fp-math"="false" "use-soft-float”=“false” } !llvm.module.flags = !{!0} !llvm.ident = !{!1} !0 = !{i32 1, !"wchar_size", i32 4} !1 = !{!"clang version 6.0.0-1ubuntu2 (tags/RELEASE_600/final)”} I tested a longer IR code and if I fixed one of the instruction number to the expected one (say from %4 to %5), it tells me that the following line’s instruction number must be the nest odd number (that %5 should be %7). I am guessing that my modification is causing a value to be produced...

...pass", false /* Only looks at CFG */, >> false /* Analysis Pass */); >> } >> >> the rest of the file is more or less straight out of the Hello example. >> >> I'm working with this llvm version >> http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/tags/RELEASE_600/final >> >> I'd appreciate any help on this issue. >> >> Viktor >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev &g...

Hi, I see things like this. What does it mean? Is it documented somewhere? Thanks. ; preds = %for.body https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html ; <label>:91: ; preds = %88 %92 = load i8**, i8*** @glob_complete_word.matches, align 8, !dbg !99798 %93 = load i32, i32* @glob_complete_word.ind, align 4, !dbg !99799 %94 = sext i32 %93 to i64, !dbg !99798

On 7 February 2018 at 01:20, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I've landed the patch in r324449. To confirm, this change *did not* make it into 6.0.0, correct? I'm looking at adding the external thunk for FreeBSD now, and we have 6.0.0 in HEAD. Assuming that future Clang releases (major, and updates) will all use __x86_indirect_thunk_r11 we

I duplicated an instruction in llvm and changed its opcode by following the guide at https://llvm.org/docs/ExtendingLLVM.html (Adding a new instruction) and then fixed the dependencies that caused an error when building. Now the modified llvm builds but throws but now throws the error: llc: error: llc: check.ll:12:3: error: instruction expected to be numbered '%5' %4 = alloca i32, align

...x,+sse,+sse2,+x87" "unsafe-fp-math"="false" "use-soft-float"="false" } !llvm.module.flags = !{!0, !1} !llvm.ident = !{!2} !0 = !{i32 1, !"wchar_size", i32 2} !1 = !{i32 7, !"PIC Level", i32 2} !2 = !{!"clang version 6.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_600/final)"} ================================================================= However I think this results in a different ABI than LLVM will use when you do i128 division. For example, here is my test case (in zig code): ================================================================= pub ext...

On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 11:42, Martin J. O'Riordan via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > A few months ago I switched from using SVN for the LLVM project to using the GIT mono-repo, but I am still not particularly good at using GIT. How can I use the GIT command-line interface to select to the exact same set of sources used for the v7.0.0 branch, Do you mean the commit

...afe-fp-math"="false" "use-soft-float"="false" } > > !llvm.module.flags = !{!0, !1} > !llvm.ident = !{!2} > > !0 = !{i32 1, !"wchar_size", i32 2} > !1 = !{i32 7, !"PIC Level", i32 2} > !2 = !{!"clang version 6.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_600/final)"} > > > ================================================================= > However I think this results in a different ABI than LLVM will use when you > do i128 division. For example, here is my test case (in zig code): > ==============================================...

..."use-soft-float"="false" } > > > > !llvm.module.flags = !{!0, !1} > > !llvm.ident = !{!2} > > > > !0 = !{i32 1, !"wchar_size", i32 2} > > !1 = !{i32 7, !"PIC Level", i32 2} > > !2 = !{!"clang version 6.0.0 (tags/RELEASE_600/final)"} > > > > > > ================================================================= > > However I think this results in a different ABI than LLVM will use when > you > > do i128 division. For example, here is my test case (in zig code): > > ===========...

Dear testers, The final version of 6.0.0 has just been tagged from the branch after r326550. It has the same contents as -rc3 modulo release notes and one small x86 fix (r326393). Please build the final binaries and upload to the sftp. For those following along: this means llvm-6.0.0 is complete, but it will take a few days to get all the tarballs ready and published on the web page. I will

I've landed the patch in r324449. Before we merge this into two different Clang release branches and almost immediately release one of them, I would really like someone to confirm that this patch works well with the Linux kernel. David, if you're up for that, it would be great. Alternatively, Guenter or someone else here can help. On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 5:59 PM Chandler Carruth