similar to: [LLVMdev] Sparc Regressions

Dear All, Here is a more complete list of regressions for the platforms listed below. Some of the regressions from the previous list I emailed a few days ago have been fixed or were false positives. Thanks to all who've helped fix things. We would like to try to get as many of these fixed as possible before I create the release branch (still scheduled for tomorrow, Friday). I'll

Chris Lattner wrote: > On Thu, 12 May 2005, John Criswell wrote: > >> Here is a more complete list of regressions for the platforms listed >> below. Some of the regressions from the previous list I emailed a few >> days ago have been fixed or were false positives. Thanks to all >> who've helped fix things. >> >> We would like to try to get as many

Ricardo wrote: > Hello, > > Is PA working on the macintosh already? Although we may not have run it on MacOS X recently, I believe that it should work. We've run it on several architectures and operating systems, including SparcV9/Solaris. If you find that PA doesn't compile or work on MacOS X, please file a bug report (http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/bugs/) so that we can fix it.

John, Thanks for the information. That comment in the source code confused me and I wanted to be sure that the installation of all the LLVM framework in the macintosh for testing the pool allocation was not going to be done in vain. The LLVM documentation states that gcc 3.4x is necessary for compiling the LLVM. On the other hand, Xtools 1.5 for Mac includes only gcc 3.3 and Xtools 2.0 includes

Sean Peisert wrote: > John, > > I may be missing something here, but if I the compilation docs, I need > to build LLVM first and the C frontend second. But doing this, I > get: > > **llvm-gcc/llvm-g++ was not found, > > (obviously -- it wasn't installed, right?) You do need to build LLVM first before building llvm-gcc. This may seem a bit weird, but

>> Everything builds fine on sparc. The configure script needs to be fixed >> though (see previous email). > > I'm not getting the error with the configure script (on Kain, anyway). I've > tried it with --with-f2c and with f96 (NAG Fortran compiler) in and out of my > $PATH. I get the error with and without the --with-f2c option. I never used the NAG Fotran

Dear LLVM Developers, The LLVM website, CVS repository, and SAFECode website should now be back online. Should you encounter any problems with the LLVM services, please send email to llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu so that we may fix it. Regards, John T. Criswell ********************************************************************* * John T. Criswell Email: criswell at uiuc.edu

Hi, It looks like the CVS server is still not available. When I try to update with cvs, I get: cvs [update aborted]: connect to llvm-cvs.cs.uiuc.edu(128.174.245.58):2401 failed: Connection refused I know the server was down earlier this week but according to the message below, its supposted to be restored by now. Could someone please help? Thanks, Reid. On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 14:30, John T.

Tanya Lattner wrote: > > Everything builds fine on sparc. The configure script needs to be fixed > though (see previous email). I'm not getting the error with the configure script (on Kain, anyway). I've tried it with --with-f2c and with f96 (NAG Fortran compiler) in and out of my $PATH. Can you verify that the configure script works for you without the --with-f2c option?

Dear All, Our main server is back up, and all LLVM services (CVS, website, etc) should be up and available for use. If you notice that something is wrong, please send an email to llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu. Thanks! -- John T. -- ********************************************************************* * John T. Criswell Email: criswell at uiuc.edu * * Research Programmer

Dear All, Do people think that they are ready to create the LLVM 1.6 release branch? I believe all the development is pretty much done. Is all the documentation in the LLVM source tree updated and ready? I'm not able to make a full doc review like I've been able to do in previous releases, so I need volunteers to work on the docs if they're not done yet. -- John T. -- John

On Thu, 12 May 2005, John Criswell wrote: > Here is a more complete list of regressions for the platforms listed below. > Some of the regressions from the previous list I emailed a few days ago have > been fixed or were false positives. Thanks to all who've helped fix things. > > We would like to try to get as many of these fixed as possible before I > create the release

Chris Morgan wrote: > Any reason not to upgrade to subversion? It does a much better job > with handling moved or renamed files although svn doesn't actually > store a 'move' or a 'rename' as a single versioned operation. We discussed moving to another revision control system about a year ago, if I recall correctly. At that time, we decided not to move to another

Alexander Friedman wrote: > On May 17, John Criswell wrote: > >>Dear All, >> >>I've finished building binaries for the GCC frontends and am now testing >> the 1.5 release branch on i386/Linux, Sparc/Solaris, and PowerPC/MacOS X. >> >>I'm looking for volunteers to test LLVM 1.5 on platforms that we don't >>have in house. I'm

Cyrille Mescam wrote: > Morning, > > I would like to know if you received my mail with the assembly code > you wanted. > > It not, i'll send it again to you. > > Thanks for your help. > > Regards. > > Cyrille > I've looked into the files you sent me, and it seems that the problem is occuring due to the C library simplication pass (which is run

Dear All, The i386 regressions: SPEC/CINT95/126.gcc/126.gcc Not too bad. :) -- John T. -- John T. Criswell Research Programmer University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign "It's today!" said Piglet. "My favorite day," said Pooh.

Dear All, I have found the following regressions on Linux/i386: 176.gcc (cbe, llc, jit) 252.eon (cbe, llc, jit) 126.gcc (cbe, llc, jit) Named (llc, jit) I ran a quick test on 176.gcc, and it doesn't seem to be an optimization problem. -- John T. -- John T. Criswell Research Programmer University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign "It's today!" said Piglet. "My favorite

Dear All, Thanks to the testing done by Bill Wendling, we have the following list of regressions for PPC: TEST (cbe) 'exception_spec_test' FAILED! ******************** TEST (cbe) 'function_try_block' FAILED! ******************** Oopack (jit, llc, and cbe) also fails, but I don't know if that's a regression or not. I'm alright with releasing with these regressions

Hi John, Please see below, too >From: John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> >Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:57:02 -0500 > >Henrik Bach wrote: >>Hi, > >Please see below. > >> >>I get this error: >>------------------ >>ToolRunner.cpp:396: error: `SHLIBEXT' undeclared (first use this function) >>ToolRunner.cpp:396: error: (Each

Thanks for the explanation. It's more clear now The only thing that seems strange is that in the function llvm_expand_shortcircuit_truth_expr in the front end, there is the creation of a PHI instruction. If there is no SSA yet, why do you do that? Thanks in advance --- John Criswell <criswell at cs.uiuc.edu> wrote: > Ricardo wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have been