similar to: [LLVMdev] Announcing LLVM 2.9 Testing!

Hi Bill, > The release tags are now available for check-out. The branch and tag structure > in SVN is detailed on this webpage: > > http://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html can you please explain explicitly where to get hold of the branch and tags. The branch seems to live at http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/branches/release_29 but there seems to be nothing relevant under

Hi all, I'm working up some changes in the way LLVM is released. Attached is the latest HTML file for HowToReleaseLLVM.html. The major change is in how we do branching and tagging. I want to use a hierarchical version of tags for the various release candidates and final release. The structure of the tags would be something like this. The 2.9 release branch:

Hi all, Well! we had a rather fruitful phase 1 testing round. Several issues were addressed. After a bit of a delay, we are ready for phase 2 testing. This phase is to make sure that no patches submitted to fix problems and complete features in phase 1 caused further difficulties. Please download the sources, compile them, and then compile as much as you can with both clang and llvm-gcc.

On 2011-03-25 08:07, Bill Wendling wrote: > Well! we had a rather fruitful phase 1 testing round. Several issues were addressed. After a bit of a delay, we are ready for phase 2 testing. > > This phase is to make sure that no patches submitted to fix problems and complete features in phase 1 caused further difficulties. Please download the sources, compile them, and then compile as much

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 15:07, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Well! we had a rather fruitful phase 1 testing round. Several issues were > addressed. After a bit of a delay, we are ready for phase 2 testing. > > This phase is to make sure that no patches submitted to fix problems and > complete features in phase 1 caused further difficulties.

Is there a tag available for LLVM 2.9? If not what's a good revision # to consider 2.9? r129053? Thanks! Joe Abbey Software Architect Arxan Technologies, Inc. www.arxan.com <http://www.arxan.com/> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On Aug 15, 2011, at 6:04 PM, Joe Abbey wrote: > Is there a tag available for LLVM 2.9? > Yes. tags/2.9 in svn. -eric -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110815/e22e08ae/attachment.html>

Sorry, I initially included LLVM-Commits rather than LLVM-Dev. Fixed. On 26 January 2017 at 03:26, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dean, Renato, > > AFAIK, unfortunately, these critical Arm32 XRay fixes are not yet in 4.0: > https://reviews.llvm.org/D28624 , https://reviews.llvm.org/D28623 . The > first repairs XRay instrumentation map emission.

How is XRay tested? IIRC, Renato didn't see any test failures on ARM? Merging sounds reasonbaly, I'd just like to understand what's the risk for the branch. On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> wrote: > Hans, these changes reached trunk in https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292516 and > https://reviews.llvm.org/rL292517 . Could you look?

i Don't know if others have raised this issue, but I'm seeing *a lot* of llvm-dev emails and cfe emails landing in my spam folder in gmail. Are other people having this problem? On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to begin the 3.4.2 release process for LLVM. There have > been two issues identified in

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 03:07:25PM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi David, > > Yes. It was the main reason why I decided to do an RC3. :-) > > -bw Bill, Any chance we can squeeze http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9571#c13 into llvm-gcc-4.2-2.9 for the final llvm-gcc release? Jack > > On Mar 28, 2011, at 10:41 AM, David Terei wrote: > > > Hi

Hi all, In LLVM documentation about source level debugging (http://www.llvm.org/releases/2.9/docs/SourceLevelDebugging.html) Subprogram descriptor is defined as: !2 = metadata !{ i32, ;; Tag = 46 + LLVMDebugVersion <http://www.llvm.org/releases/2.9/docs/SourceLevelDebugging.html#LLVMDebugVersion> ;; (DW_TAG_subprogram) i32, ;; Unused field. metadata, ;;

Hi Bill, Is the fix for Bug 9561 included? (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9561) Cheers, David. On 26 March 2011 18:38, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > The good news: RC2 testing was successful in that it uncovered a bad regression from 2.8 (which existed in top-of-tree). It also showed that there was an unincorporated fix that needed to go into

I'm wondering why the lit tests didn't catch this as part of testing rc1 on ARM. On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> wrote: > XRay is tested automatically on build-bots with tests in LLVM and > compiler-rt . Or are you asking for manual testing instructions? > Of these 2 patches, the compiler-rt patch depends on LLVM patch because

Hi, I would like to begin the 3.4.2 release process for LLVM. There have been two issues identified in 3.4.1, which there is interest in having fixed in a 3.4.x release: 1. Build failure with gcc 4.9 (This is not a regression, 3.4 also fails to build with gcc 4.9). 2. Accidental change of libLLVM's DT_SONAME from libLLVM-3.4 libLLVM-3.4.1.so I will also accept any other bug-fixes that

Hi David, Yes. It was the main reason why I decided to do an RC3. :-) -bw On Mar 28, 2011, at 10:41 AM, David Terei wrote: > Hi Bill, > > Is the fix for Bug 9561 included? (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9561) > > Cheers, > David. > > On 26 March 2011 18:38, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> The good news:

On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > On 03/08/11 04:01, Bill Wendling wrote: >> It's that time again! (Well, it was that time yesterday, but I made a mistake.) The LLVM 2.9 release is now underway! > >> Developers: >> >> Top-of-tree is now open for submissions. The 2.9 release branch and tags are available for you to check out and test.

Hello LLVMers! Amazingly, it's been 4 months since the release of LLVM 2.8. And so much has changed since then! April will be six months since the previous release, so it's time to start thinking about LLVM 2.9! Here is a tentative schedule for the release (and, of course, our schedules never slip): March 6th - Branch for release. March 7th-14th - Testing Phase 1

I see. Thanks for clarifying. I'm Ok with merging these if Dean agrees, as I believe he's the code owner. Thanks, Hans On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Serge Rogatch <serge.rogatch at gmail.com> wrote: > There were no LLVM tests for presence of XRay instrumentation map in the > emitted assembly. You can see that https://reviews.llvm.org/D28624 adds this > check to the

Hi, I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process. The current process is documented here: https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html There are two parts to this proposal. The first is a list of clarifications, which are things we are currently doing that aren't documented. The second is a list of changes which would actually modify how releases are currently managed.