similar to: [LLVMdev] X86 DejaGnu status

Ok. Like I said, I am not too concerned with one or two llcbeta failures. That's expected. Thx, Evan On Oct 5, 2007, at 3:18 PM, Arnold Schwaighofer <arnold.schwaighofer at gmail.com > wrote: > Another round ;) Sadly not beer. > > tested against r42630 darwin-x86: > SPASS llc-beta still fails > > thanks for the patience > > On 5 Oct 2007, at 20:58, Evan

There have been some changes in X86RegisterInfo.cpp that make my last patch not merge. Also there was an error in my code concerning how inreg parameters were lowered. the latest version of the patch does not fail the SPASS llc-beta test anymore (darwin-x86). if/when someone has the time to look at it - i would be happy to mail it. i think i should no longer clobber the mailing list with

Two failing tests on x86-32 linux: FAIL: test/FrontendC/2008-08-07-AlignPadding1.c Failed with exit(1) at line 1 while running: /usr/local/bin/llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -w test/FrontendC/2008-08-07-AlignPadding1.c -m64 -S -o - -emit-llvm -O0 | grep

On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:29 AM, Arnold Schwaighofer wrote: > There have been some changes in X86RegisterInfo.cpp that make my last > patch not merge. Sorry, I know it's a moving target. :-) > > Also there was an error in my code concerning how inreg parameters > were lowered. > > the latest version of the patch does not fail the SPASS llc-beta test > anymore

Scott, In case you missed it, I reimplemented your BuildVectorSDNode::isConstantSplat method following the suggestions from Chris. The revised version passes "make check" for llvm. Assuming that it also passes Evan's tests, I think it should also do what you need for CellSPU. On Feb 25, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Scott Michel wrote: > Evan: > > I work on reverting it,

It's me. Our ISD::LABEL implementation has issues... Evan On Jan 30, 2008, at 9:34 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > On Jan 30, 2008, at 9:12 PM, Apache wrote: > >> http://llvm.org/nightlytest/test.php?machine=231&night=4754 >> Name: il0102a-dhcp80.apple.com >> Nickname: OldGrawp-O0-PIC >> Buildstatus: OK >> >> New Test Passes: >>

No plans. I recommend you hack on it. :-) Sorry, all features are done on demand. Evan On Jun 12, 2009, at 1:08 PM, Mark Shannon wrote: > Evan, > > Any plans to add it any time soon? > It would be really appreciated. > > Evan Cheng wrote: >> X86 JIT does not yet support TLS. >> >> Evan >> On Jun 12, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Mark Shannon wrote: >>

Evan, Any plans to add it any time soon? It would be really appreciated. Evan Cheng wrote: > X86 JIT does not yet support TLS. > > Evan > On Jun 12, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Mark Shannon wrote: > >> Hi there, >> >> I think I've found a bug in the x86 JIT. I get an assertion failure >> when >> using thread-local variables and the fast emitter.

On Feb 16, 2008, at 11:32 AM, Evan Cheng wrote: > But I am using llvm-gcc-4.2. Any idea why it's failing? > > Evan All the failing testers are using gcc-4.0 according to the web pages they point at. > On Feb 16, 2008, at 11:24 AM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > >> On Feb 16, 2008, at 7:06 AM, Apache wrote: >>> New Test Failures: >>>

Evan: I work on reverting it, although, when I tried yesterday, it wasn't particularly clean (lots of rejected patches, presumably due to intervening commits.) Are you still getting the backtrace or is this just a case of incorrectly generated code? -scooter On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Evan Cheng <echeng at apple.com> wrote: > Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm

llvm itself is built with gcc-4.0, but the run line is: // RUN: %llvmgxx -S -O0 -emit-llvm %s -o - | grep retval | grep S242 | grep {i32 1} | count 2 According the log: FAIL: /Volumes/Muggles/LLVM/nightlytest-pic/build/llvm/test/C+ +Frontend/2008-02-13-sret.cpp Failed with exit(1) at line 1 while running: /usr/local/bin/llvm-gcc -emit-llvm -S -O0 -emit-llvm /

Hi Evans, Currently, we have not test all debug functionnalities, this will be done with the progress of our project. Could you explain more in details (by mail if possible) what is the problem with aggregates and debugging ? Could you also provide C program or llvm source file that exposes this problem in order to see what we can do? During our roadmap progress, FlexyCore will not hesitate to

On Dec 11, 2008, at 8:23 AM, Mike-1 wrote: > > Thanks for the commit. > > FlexyCore works only on ARM EABI Linux target for now. This binary > with > Dwarf information could be debugged with a gdb-server 6.8 without > problem on > our side. Good to hear. Are you able to examine aggregates? > > > If you are working on ARM Linux target, could you send us LLVM

Things are still broken. Unfortunately llvm test suite does not contain enough vector code to fully test this. Can you revert the patch first? Evan On Feb 24, 2009, at 7:14 PM, Scott Michel wrote: > Evan: > > I did not encounter this back trace before I committed the newest > BuildVectorSDNode patch, which removed all class instance members > and passes results back via

Evan: I did not encounter this back trace before I committed the newest BuildVectorSDNode patch, which removed all class instance members and passes results back via reference parameters. -scooter On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > I believe this patch has broken a PPC app that I am tracking. Here is a > reduced test case. Reproduce

Platform: i686-pc-gnu-linux === Summary === # of expected passes 1408 # of expected failures 38 Reid.

Thanks for the commit. FlexyCore works only on ARM EABI Linux target for now. This binary with Dwarf information could be debugged with a gdb-server 6.8 without problem on our side. If you are working on ARM Linux target, could you send us LLVM source file, and gdb version ? But if you are using ARM Darwin as Anton suggest, we are unable to test this for now. We are open to help on this

Yes please. Evan On Oct 5, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Arnold Schwaighofer wrote: > > On 5 Oct 2007, at 20:47, Evan Cheng wrote: > >> >> On Oct 5, 2007, at 10:56 AM, Arnold Schwaighofer wrote: >> >>> >>>> We can set a policy of treating fastcc external functions >>>> as c functions. Then there is no chance of introducing ABI >>>>

Hi, I can't reproduce these failures on my linux machine. The test machine seems to be running darwin. I suspect that the problem might be with RIP relative addressing, or with the encoding of R12/R13, but the code seems to handle the latter, since it checks for ESP/EBP which is the same as R12/R13. Zoltan On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at

On Jan 30, 2008, at 9:12 PM, Apache wrote: > http://llvm.org/nightlytest/test.php?machine=231&night=4754 > Name: il0102a-dhcp80.apple.com > Nickname: OldGrawp-O0-PIC > Buildstatus: OK > > New Test Passes: > test/CFrontend/2008-01-28-PragmaMark.c [DEJAGNU] > > > New Test Failures: > Benchmarks/Shootout-C++/except [LLC compile, ] >