similar to: [LLVMdev] Things are Broken ... Again *shock*

> Not that anyone actually cares, but things are broken again. Probably > want to fix it. > > Then again, probably not. It's all an evil plan to try you insane! Ciao, Duncan.

Mike's suggestion seems to fix the problem - happy to use it, although my impression is that it shouldn't be necessary? -David Shipman On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 5:46 PM, David Shipman <dshipman at gmail.com> wrote: >> I've just tried building r54494 on 64bit linux and had the same (no

On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 5:46 PM, David Shipman <dshipman at gmail.com> wrote: > I've just tried building r54494 on 64bit linux and had the same (no > include path) > error. Any idea what's happening here? > No. :-( Could you try Mike's suggestion? (Replicated here) Try adding: #define _GCC_LIMITS_H_ to limitx.h like so: #ifdef _GCC_NEXT_LIMITS_H +#define

FYI: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-October/066389.html Please read and let me know you comments. -bw On Oct 11, 2013, at 2:47 PM, Dmitry Babokin <babokin at gmail.com> wrote: > Looking forward to these changes! Thanks for working on it. > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > I

Hi all, In the last few days, some change introduced an internal compiler error. On my G4 (PPC), I'm getting this: $ cat testcase.i struct A {}; struct B { struct A c[0]; }; extern const struct B *pB; void bork(void) { const struct A *pA = pB->c; } $ /Users/wendling/llvm/llvm-gcc-4.2.obj/./gcc/xgcc -B/Users/wendling/ llvm/llvm-gcc-4.2.obj/./gcc/ -B/Users/wendling/llvm/llvm-

Yes, this is me. I'll look at this tonight when I have access to a machine. Evan On Jan 27, 2008, at 1:01 AM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > In the last few days, some change introduced an internal compiler > error. On my G4 (PPC), I'm getting this: > > $ cat testcase.i > struct A {}; > struct B { > struct A c[0]; > };

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi Bill, >> > >> > Thanks for the testing case. Most of the time is

Looking forward to these changes! Thanks for working on it. On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > I can try my best, but it would be a bit tricky to get it all finished by > then... > > -bw > > On Oct 11, 2013, at 4:10 AM, Dmitry Babokin <babokin at gmail.com> wrote: > > Bill, > > Are there

Hi Matthijs, >> I did put in a hack, but it was horrible. It might be a good idea to >> test out Mike's suggestion to see if it's a better way of doing it. > I just tried building llvm-gcc without your hack, and it still works (even > without the fix Mike suggested). > > So, it seems that r54245 can be reverted again? > > I didn't test bootstrap, however,

+grosbach Hi Hal, Re (1): Jim is our resident ARM expert. Adding him here. Re (2): There are a ton of simple programs that have been reported over the last month that are failing at higher levels. It's quite disturbing, really. I don't have a lot of time to debug these (it's no longer my main job to work on LLVM). I'll try to press people as much as possible. -bw On Wed, Dec

On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:07 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > >> A debug or release build? >> >> -bw > > Both, actually. Weird. I see a potential problem, though. The code is like this: void dumpToDOUT(SparseBitVector<> *bitmap) { dump(*bitmap, DOUT); } where dump expects an llvm::OStream& for the

The third 3.5 release candidate is now available. Please pick up sources and binaries here: https://llvm.org/pre-release/3.5 Run it through its phases and report any bugs you find! Share and enjoy! -bw

I''ve been thinking about this for a while, from a perspective of how to make it work by allocating i-node numbers from a global pool, but yesterday I realized that offering the feature would be a bad idea because it violates the semantics of file systems. I will be happy to expand on that point if anyone disagrees with it. dln -- "It is merely a matter of persistence." --

I've just tried building r54494 on 64bit linux and had the same (no include path) error. Any idea what's happening here? Thanks, -David Shipman On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Matthijs, > >>> I did put in a hack, but it was horrible. It might be a good idea to >>> test out Mike's suggestion to see if

On 9/25/07, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On 9/24/07, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote: > > > > Weird. I see a potential problem, though. The code is like this: > > > > void dumpToDOUT(SparseBitVector<> *bitmap) { > > dump(*bitmap, DOUT); > > } >

Hi Dmitry, I can try my best, but it would be a bit tricky to get it all finished by then... -bw On Oct 11, 2013, at 4:10 AM, Dmitry Babokin <babokin at gmail.com> wrote: > Bill, > > Are there any chances that you complete it before 3.4 is branched? > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 10, 2013, at

Hi, The add.with.overflow instrinsics don't seem to work with constant arguments, i.e. changing the call in add-with-overflow.ll to: %t = call {i32, i1} @llvm.sadd.with.overflow.i32(i32 0, i32 0) causes the following exception when running the codegen tests: llc: DAGCombiner.cpp:646: void<unnamed>::DAGCombiner::Run(llvm::CombineLevel): Assertion `N->getValueType(0) ==

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Eli Friedman<eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Bill Wendling<isanbard at gmail.com> wrote: >> The core problem, in my opinion, is that people *don't* pay attention >> to the build bot failure messages that come along. > > That's largely because of the number of false positives. > There

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Manman Ren <manman.ren at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > > > Thanks for the testing case. Most of the time is spent on debug info > > verifier. > > I fixed a bug in r194974, now it takes too long to run debug info > >

Applied. Thanks, Zoltan! -bw On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Zoltan Varga <vargaz at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Attached is the final version of the patch, adding the requested > FIXME. If this is ok, can > somebody check it in ? > > thanks > > Zoltan > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 9:58 PM,