similar to: [LLVMdev] Need volunteers to fix 2.6 release bugs

LLVMers, As LLVM grows and begins to support more targets and more frontends, its becoming a very large task to qualify a release. Therefore, I'm seeking a couple of active members of the community to volunteer to be a part of the LLVM release team (for 2.6+). This does not replace general user testing during the release process. Members of this LLVM Release Team will need to be very

Ok, I have good news! Thanks for the help! On Jun 2, 2008, at 11:11 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > Many of you are probably wondering about the status of the 2.3 > release. Unfortunately, this release has been very difficult and > the list of regressions very high. The list has finally dwindled > down to the following regressions: > > Linux/x86: >

I'm still in need for moderators for the following sessions: > Moderator #3 (11:15-12:45, Regency 1) > Verified LLVM: Formalizing the semantics of the LLVM Intermediate Representation for Verified Program Transformations- Santosh Nagarakatte, University of Pennsylvania/Rutgers University > Integrated Security, using LLVM for Dynamic and Static Security Tasks- Jared Carlson,

I can do it! -Raphael On Oct 16, 2017 12:48 PM, "Tanya Lattner via llvm-devmeeting" < llvm-devmeeting at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Can anyone help with this session? > > *Session 10 (2:10-3:40PM, General Session)* > Adding Index‐While‐Building and Refactoring to Clang > Advancing Clangd: Bringing persisted indexing to Clang tooling > > Thanks, > Tanya >

Bah, headers still broken, sending to list this time: On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 6:30 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Tanya Lattner <lattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 13, 2010, at 7:01 AM, R P Herrold wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010, Tanya Lattner wrote: >>> >>>>> I

Has there been much thought of attempting to automate this process? I could imagine a fairly standard script that scrubbed a history for interesting tidbits. Of course a standard methodology for labeling types of commits would help this in the future. A very simple script could at least do unique word counts and throw out words that match a dictionary (like parts of speech, contributer names,

Many of you are probably wondering about the status of the 2.3 release. Unfortunately, this release has been very difficult and the list of regressions very high. The list has finally dwindled down to the following regressions: Linux/x86: SingleSource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/fftbench [ JIT Codegen, JIT] MultiSource/Applications/minisat/minisat [CBE] Darwin/x86:

On Oct 27, 2011, at 5:37 PM, Michael Price wrote: > Has there been much thought of attempting to automate this process? I could imagine a fairly standard script that scrubbed a history for interesting tidbits. Of course a standard methodology for labeling types of commits would help this in the future. > > A very simple script could at least do unique word counts and throw out words

All, We need volunteers for the Hacker’s Lab at the upcoming 2017 LLVM Developers’ Meeting! The Hacker’s Lab is for small groups to form to discuss topics or work on problems. Please let me know ASAP if you will able to volunteer so I can add your topic to the online listing and make appropriate signs. The Hackers Lab is split into 1.5 hour sessions. During each session, the Hackers Lab will

We need some volunteers to help with the 3.0 release notes. Traditionally, Chris has been the one to go through all the commits (6 months worth!) and come up with a concrete list of things that have changed in 3.0. Ideally, its much better if this document is incrementally updated as well, but we know how that goes. This is a huge amount of work and with the pace that LLVM/Clang are being

I'm looking for someone to qualify x86-32 linux for 2.7 and beyond. If you want a basic idea of how the release process works, see this: http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html Please email me if you are interested! Thanks, Tanya -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On Jun 2, 2008, at 11:11 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > Many of you are probably wondering about the status of the 2.3 > release. Unfortunately, this release has been very difficult and the > list of regressions very high. The list has finally dwindled down to > the following regressions: > ... > Darwin/ppc: > SingleSource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/fftbench [ CBE ] For my

Tanya Lattner wrote: > Many of you are probably wondering about the status of the 2.3 > release. Unfortunately, this release has been very difficult and the > list of regressions very high. The list has finally dwindled down to > the following regressions: > > Linux/x86: > SingleSource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/fftbench [ JIT Codegen, JIT] Increasing ulimit to 230 Mb (from

Tanya Lattner wrote: > So, I need to rerun all the tests and package things up. Chris is > working on the release notes. Hopefully we can have this out by the end > of the week. Did you apply my patch to get 2.3 to build in Visual Studio 'out of the box'? ... I never saw any more replies and I'm not subscribed to llvm-commits, so I don't know if it went in. m.

Hello, Tanya > 4) Mingw x86 (Anton do you want to continue this?) Yes, I'm still going to prepare llvm-gcc mingw32 images. However, the testing procedure for mingw is slightly different due to lack of dejagnu stuff. However, I have plans to fix the main LLVM testsuite to be more mingw32-friendly :) -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint

On Jun 2, 2008, at 11:11 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > Darwin/ppc: > SingleSource/Benchmarks/CoyoteBench/fftbench [ CBE ] > From what I can see comparing 2.3 with TOT, the "cexp" function is declared like this in 2.3: declare i128 @cexp({double, double}* byval) nounwind It used to be this: declare void @cexp({double, double}* noalias sret, {double, double}* byval)

I noticed that the mingw release only contains binaries and not libraries nor header files. I think it would be nice if the mingw release contained the same files as the other releases. This would mean that people who want to use LLVM with the Haskell bindings on Windows don't have to build and install LLVM (first installing mingw), but they could just download binaries and install those.

I apologize for the delay in setting the 2.6 schedule. Please be aware that we are now moving to a ~6 month release cycle. In addition, 2.6 will be our first release that includes Clang. 08/21 - Code freeze 08/28 - Pre-release1 testing begins 09/04 - Pre-release1 testing ends 09/11 - Pre-release2 testing begins 09/18 - Pre-release2 testing ends 09/21 - Release 2.6 For those that emailed me

Hello LLVM Developers! Last year, the LLVM Foundation sponsored a booth at the Grace Hopper Conference. I had 2 amazing volunteers from the community, David Blaikie and Anna Zaks, help me spread the word about LLVM, compilers, and open source. It was a great experience and we are hoping to repeat this at the upcoming 2018 Grace Hopper conference in Houston, TX on September 26-28. I’m looking

Hello, I am in need of moderators to help moderate each session. If you are interested, please respond to this mail and indicate which slot you can moderate. Its a long shot as you would miss talks, but if anyone wants a break to do work or check email while also staffing the registration desk, please let me know if you can do it during any of the sessions below. Thanks! Options: Moderator #1