similar to: [LLVMdev] Update git Document

FlyLanguage <flylanguage at gmail.com> writes: > 2) Nobody writing up how git should be used with the current llvm > workflow (which is not going to adapt to an SCM, but the other way > around, which is understandable.) Here is a first cut at that. Other git users, please chime in with suggestions, edits, etc. Non-git users, please ask for clarification where needed. This is

Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> writes: > I believe git has a similar system for maintaining "branches of patches"  A pointer/tutorial on how to do this would be most welcome. -Dave

This is why I posted a link to the transition plan for Python - http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0385/ - to use as a model for LLVM's transition. There are a lot of questions which need to be answered: -- Where will the main repository be hosted? -- What branches will be copied over from svn to the main repository? -- What tools will be used to copy the history? -- What presubmit hooks will

Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy at grenoble-inp.fr> writes: > dag at cray.com (David A. Greene) writes: > >> Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> writes: >> >>> I believe git has a similar system for maintaining "branches of patches"  >> >> A pointer/tutorial on how to do this would be most welcome. > > It depends on the definition of

Have we made any progress on a potential git conversion? AFAIK the only outstanding technical issue is the monotonic revision number question. Personally, I have no nead for them but others have expressed reservation about losing them. Can we have a discussion about that to identify the core tasks currently needing monotnic revision numbers and how they might be accomplished under git?

So. As long as the core devs are half mute on the topic, I don't think anything will happen. Asking a bunch of mostly irrelevant questions with no answers will not help. Let's face it, Joe Dragon is pretty much happy with svn and there's an svn-git bridge for the rest of us. > This is why I posted a link to the transition plan for Python - >

Hi,   I developed a Loop Interchange pass. Please take a look. I have not incorporate data dependence analysis check. I can insert it when the LoopDependenceAnalysis is available.   Thank you Satya -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100713/654d5fd5/attachment.html> --------------

On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:09 PM, David A. Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> writes: > > >> Let's face it, Joe Dragon is pretty much happy with svn and there's an > >> svn-git bridge for the rest of us. > > The svn-git bridge is broken as several people stated before. It is > easier to contribute code via

dag at cray.com (David A. Greene) writes: > Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> writes: > >> I believe git has a similar system for maintaining "branches of patches"  > > A pointer/tutorial on how to do this would be most welcome. It depends on the definition of "branches of patches" ;-). I manage my patches with "git rebase -i", which

Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> writes: >> Ok, but that doesn't answer the question. Is SchedulerDAG going away? >> If so, what's the timeframe for that? 3.2? > > SchedulerDAG is used for both SD scheduling and MI scheduling. It's not going away. Oh! That's good news! > SD scheduling is not going away in 3.2--it will be the first release with MI

On Wednesday 02 December 2009 16:51, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 2:44 PM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > > I'm working on some of the AVX insert/extract instructions.  They're > > stupid.  They do not operate on ymm registers, meaning we have to > > use VINSERTF128/VEXTRACTF128 and then do the real operation. > > > > Anyway,

On Wednesday 02 December 2009 17:24, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:08 PM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 02 December 2009 16:51, Eli Friedman wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 2:44 PM, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > >> > I'm working on some of the AVX insert/extract instructions.  They're >

Hi, This probably isn't significant evidence about using svn as the authoritative revision control system for llvm but more just to point out that the svn users tend to consider that the only thing one would use revision control for is the mainstream development history tracking. I'll note that I during working ("development" but also bug-fixing and experimentation) since the

Dear all, I would like to suggest the following changes to the R documentation: 1) R-exts.texi: Having had my first experience with uploading a package to ftp://cran.R-project.org/incoming/, I think it would be nice if the documentation pointed out that one should use ftp and not sftp (at least on my machine sftp failed to make a connection) and that one should log in as user

On May 9, 2012, at 8:34 AM, dag at cray.com wrote: > Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> writes: > >>> When I asked about enhancing scheduler heuristics a month or so ago, I >>> got a response about a MachineInstr scheduler and that that was the way >>> of the LLVM future. Is that so? Is the ScheduleDAG going away? >> >> You sent a lengthy RFC

On Tuesday 27 April 2010 13:56:05 Renato Golin wrote: > On 27 April 2010 19:16, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > > IMHO, LLVM is the wrong > > place to deal with these.  It should be done at a higher level. > > It _can_ be done at the LLVM IR level, but much less conveniently. > > Now I agree with you, completely. ;) I suspect not. :) I still mean within

I think it is erroneous to have the subrepository projects and tools listed in .gitignore. Instead of being ignored, methinks they should be listed as submodules in .gitmodules: [submodule "tools/clang"] path = tools/clang url = ../clang.git [submodule "projects/compiler-rt"] path = projects/compiler-rt url = ../compiler-rt.git [submodule

Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:52 AM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: > >> Is svn metadata missing from some of the upstream git mirrors? I really >> don't want to git-svn fetch if I can avoid it. > > I use it for clang and llvm. I haven't tried for the others. According to the web page, it should at least work

Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> writes: > +David Greene<mailto:dag at cray.com> as someone who might have an opinion. > > I don't have a strong opinion, but if someone wants to try to make the > docs better and more friendly to them I'm totally down :) Thanks for the CC. I think combining them makes sense. I recall having similar issues finding things

On Monday 15 February 2010 11:54:25 Óscar Fuentes wrote: > David Greene <dag at cray.com> writes: > > Sorry, I botched a commit and broke the build. I've just committed a > > fix. > > > > So expect to see some buildbot churning. > > Don't hurry. A buildbot already decided that I am the only culprit of > the breakage. :-/ Hmm...given that