similar to: [LLVMdev] Testing backend

Vladimir, The makefile for the feature tests is in the directory above. Simply: cd ~/llvm/test make Feature.t This works for the regression tests to: make Regression.t The tests are run QMTest which just "knows" what to do with the test file. In many cases there is a RUN: line which instructs the test harness how to run the test. On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 05:18, Vladimir Prus wrote:

Hi Reid, > The makefile for the feature tests is in the directory above. Simply: > > cd ~/llvm/test > make Feature.t > > This works for the regression tests to: > > make Regression.t Thanks, > The tests are run QMTest which just "knows" what to do with the test > file. In many cases there is a RUN: line which instructs the test > harness how to run the

I attempt install and use qmtest for run LLVM testsuit at FreeBSD, but without success. I have installed qm-2.2 (latest and single version accessable from http://www.codesourcery.com/qmtest/download.html in sources) When I start qmtest for LLVM ("make qmtest" in <llvm-obj-dir>/test directory - right?) error printed: ---8X---------------

> > Cons of QMTest: > > 1) You have to use the gui to add directories. > > I think you're wrong. Manually creating a directory would work, as QMTest does > not place anything special in directories. I may have worded this poorly, but I think you have to use the gui to add new directories or tests, or specific tests. Otherwise, it does not know what to do with those

Reid Spencer wrote: > Vladimir, > > The makefile for the feature tests is in the directory above. Simply: > > cd ~/llvm/test > make Feature.t > > This works for the regression tests to: > > make Regression.t > > The tests are run QMTest which just "knows" what to do with the test > file. In many cases there is a RUN: line which instructs the

Hello, I'm playing with alias analysis, using the following program: %i = external global int ; <int*> [#uses=2] implementation ; Functions: int %_Z3bari(int %p) { entry: %tmp.0 = load int* %i ; <int> [#uses=1] %tmp.1 = setgt int %tmp.0, 10 ; <bool> [#uses=1] br bool %tmp.1, label %then, label %UnifiedReturnBlock then:

Boy does THAT look familiar .. The problem is that you need an older version of QMTest, version 2.0.3 to be exact. The configuration of QMTest that LLVM uses won't work with 2.2 Reid. On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 10:53, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: > I attempt install and use qmtest for run LLVM testsuit at FreeBSD, but > without success. > > I have installed qm-2.2 (latest and single

Hello, I've just tries make && make install on a fresh CVS tree, and get: llvm[0]: Installing include files /bin/sh: line 1: pax: command not found Two questions. 1. Why install process requires some nonstandard tool? Is it possible to get away without it. 2. autoconf/configure.ac has this: AC_PATH_PROG(PAX, [pax], [pax]) but Makefile.rules uses plain 'pax',

On Monday 25 April 2005 14:43, Vladimir Prus wrote: > The 'i' variable is never modified in the program, however, all analyses > except for -globalsmodref-aa report that the > > %tmp.3 = call int %_Z3bari( int %p ) ; <int> [#uses=1] > > instruction can modify 'i'. I'm somewhat surprised, because it looks like > -globalsmodref-aa is the simplest

The above-mentioned test contains this: long B53 = - (1LL << 53); strictly speaking, this is not correct code. The C standard says about shift: "if the value of the first operator is ... or greater than ... the width of the promoted left operand, the behaviour is underfined". Thouhts? - Volodya

Folks, With some MacOS help from Nate, I've begun the conversion of LLVM to use lib/System, the operating system independence layer. Currently, the library has implementations for three abstractions: Path, Program, and Signals. These provide some basic utilities for manipulating file system paths, finding and executing programs, and cleaning up after Signals. The implementations should work

On Sat, 13 May 2006, Vladimir Prus wrote: >> If you're interested, please try it out. > I get this with LLVM CVS: > Adding: > #include "llvm/Target/TargetData.h" > Fixed this. Right, thanks. > Chris, any change you'll make gcc4 frontend source available from some CVS? > Then, I can put together a script to build it every night, to make sure > things

Hi! When I go to http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/doxygen/annotated.html and click on link for, say, "llvm::Module", I've told that the target page does not exist. Same happens for llvm::Value, and in fact everything under "llvm" namespace. Any idea what's wrong? - Volodya

Hi, I have two questions about the above method of the SelectionDAGISel class. 1. The overrides in PPCDAGToDAGISel and in I64DAGToDAGISel are identical (except for PPCISD::FIRST_NUMBER vs. IA64ISD::FIRST_NUMBER). Maybe, this means that it would be better if SelectionDAGISel had default implementation? That would remove this code duplication. If desired, SelectionDAGISel can have both

Jeff, Actually, that was my fault. I forgot to remove the non-existent directories from the configure.ac file. That's done and committed now, so the advice is still the same: update configure script :) Reid. On Sun, 2004-09-05 at 09:53, Jeff Cohen wrote: > Configure gives me these errors on FreeBSD. I'm proceding with the build anyway to see what happens. Don't worry :)

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 10:49:44 -0700 Reid Spencer <reid at x10sys.com> wrote: > Jeff, > > Actually, that was my fault. I forgot to remove the non-existent > directories from the configure.ac file. That's done and committed > now, so the advice is still the same: update configure script :) > > Reid. OK, no problems building. I got some minor issues with the simple

Hi Reid, > Instructions are members of a linked list. Consequently if you insert > some Instruction, that instruction gets changed. So, its not const. > > Simple enough? Yes, thank you. I started thinking if "mutable" is right here, but that's long philosophical issue ;-) - Volodya

I've just had some fun, because I wanted to override FunctionPass::addAnalysisUsage, but forgot "const" after the method name -- so instead of overriding I've just created a new unrelated method. After spending some time on this, I've decided to add -Woverloaded-virtual option to compiler to catch such cases. However, it also gives some warnings on LLVM code:

Reid Spencer wrote: > Volodya, > > I think you may need to update your CFE and rebuild. I compiled the test > using my local build and I didn't get the results you see below. I'm > also very surprised to see this output. The first %tmp.11 should have > been %tmp.1 .. not sure how it got corrupted. In any event, the > attachment is obviously generated by code that runs

Vladimir Prus wrote: > Vladimir Prus wrote: > > The above-mentioned test contains this: > > > > long B53 = - (1LL << 53); > > > > strictly speaking, this is not correct code. The C standard says about > > shift: "if the value of the first operator is ... or greater than ... the > > width of the promoted left operand, the behaviour is