search for: tcwglab

...39;m guessing you can help me understand what's going on. If my buildbot config is: jobs=2, nt_flags=['--cflag', '-mcpu=cortex-a15', '--use-perf', '--threads=1', '--build-threads=4'] It uses -j4 for build, -j2 for running the tests: http://buildmaster.tcwglab.linaro.org/builders/clang-native-arm-lnt-perf/builds/35/steps/test-suite/logs/stdio If my buildbot config is: jobs=4, nt_flags=['--cflag', '-mcpu=cortex-a15', '--use-perf', '--threads=1', '--build-threads=4'] It uses -j4 for build, -j4 for running the test...

...ocales if they cannot be used, just like the "fr_FR" ones? Shouldn't we try to enquire what's the default locale of the system and use that instead? But for the time being, what would be a quick fix to make the tests run and pass for now? cheers, --renato [1] http://buildmaster.tcwglab.linaro.org/builders/clang-cmake-aarch64-prototype

Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:00, David Greene <greened at obbligato.org> wrote: >> Can you elaborate? I'm talking about very small tests targeted to >> generate a specific instruction or small number of instructions. >> Vectorization isn't the best example. Something like verifying FMA >> generation is a

...esn't have _URC_OK defined (introduced in r262178, just after 3.8 split). But on that commit, the personality routine depends on it for EHABI calls, which is defined by default on ARM environments. The end result is that I can only use Clang 3.9+ to compile libunwind 3.9+. http://buildmaster.tcwglab.linaro.org/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15-full/builds/1788/steps/build%20stage%201/logs/stdio compiler-rt/lib/builtins/gcc_personality_v0.c:149:57: error: use of undeclared identifier '_URC_OK'; did you mean '_UVRSR_OK'? if (__gnu_unwind_frame(exceptionObject, context) != _URC_...

...build. What we actually need is "configure some" -> "build some" -> "configure some more" -> "build some more" -> repeat until done. Well, GCC has been doing this for years, and I have just setup a simpler version of it here: http://buildmaster.tcwglab.linaro.org/builders/clang-cmake-aarch64-prototype To avoid the partial configuration problem, you can build in multiple stages and increment the level of support in each one until you have a complete toolchain in the end. > For our projects the first step of a bootstrap is building a clang th...

On 5 September 2016 at 23:04, Krzysztof Parzyszek <kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Let's first see how bad it is once bots are fixed to build the latest > revision. It's only been a few days and that includes a weekend. Of course. I'll wait until all our bots return from the first round to know the size of the damage. I just wanted to warn all other buildbot owners

...there a proposal somewhere of what companies would be expected to do? It's difficult for us engineers to talk to management without a concrete set of expectations, resource requirements, etc. > I created a page for the Arm bots (after many incarnations, it ended > up here: http://ex40-01.tcwglab.linaro.org/) to make that simpler. But > that wouldn't scale, nor it fixes the real problems. Nice! That's much better. Yes, it won't scale but it's much clearer about what is being run. -David

> On Aug 26, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 26 August 2015 at 15:44, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >> What time-line do you have in mind for this fix? If you are in charge >> and can make this happen within a day, giving cmake + ninja a chance seems >> OK. > > It's not my bot.

On 12 June 2016 at 00:35, Sean Silva via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> I think the fundamental distinction needs to be following dependency >> graphs because if we don’t get rid of the circular dependency in >> bootstrapping there is no reason to make any changes. > > +1 for what Chandler said here. > > I don't think CMake itself per se