similar to: [LLVMdev] make check-all failing 18 tests with --enable-optimized

On 12/13/11 01:09, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Brendan Kirby <bkirby at mips.com> wrote: >> As part of our automated testing, I'm running make check-all to watch >> for failures. One of my builds uses the --enable-optimized option to >> configure. When I build the latest trunk, I'm now seeing 18 failing >> tests: >>

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Brendan Kirby <bkirby at mips.com> wrote: > As part of our automated testing, I'm running make check-all to watch > for failures.  One of my builds uses the --enable-optimized option to > configure. When I build the latest trunk, I'm now seeing 18 failing > tests: >    Clang :: Preprocessor/macro_paste_c_block_comment.c >    LLVM ::

On 12/12/11 19:29, Evan Cheng wrote: > On Dec 12, 2011, at 6:26 PM, Brendan Kirby wrote: > >> As part of our automated testing, I'm running make check-all to watch >> for failures. One of my builds uses the --enable-optimized option to >> configure. When I build the latest trunk, I'm now seeing 18 failing >> tests: >> Clang ::

On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 08:23 -0800, Brendan Kirby wrote: > On 12/13/11 01:09, Eli Friedman wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Brendan Kirby <bkirby at mips.com> wrote: > >> As part of our automated testing, I'm running make check-all to watch > >> for failures. One of my builds uses the --enable-optimized option to > >> configure. When I build

On Dec 12, 2011, at 6:26 PM, Brendan Kirby wrote: > As part of our automated testing, I'm running make check-all to watch > for failures. One of my builds uses the --enable-optimized option to > configure. When I build the latest trunk, I'm now seeing 18 failing > tests: > Clang :: Preprocessor/macro_paste_c_block_comment.c > LLVM ::

I have now made a report at http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11552. Patrik Hägglund -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Patrik Hägglund H Sent: den 13 december 2011 08:07 To: Brendan Kirby; Evan Cheng Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] make check-all failing 18 tests with --enable-optimized I

I don't know about the LLVM errors, but I have seen the Clang error before. It occurs because the test is not path independent. In Preprocessor/macro_paste_c_block_comment.c you have 'nog grep scratch', which means that you can't have 'scratch' in your path. I think this should be reported as a bug. Regards, Patrik Hägglund -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces

Thanks for this, I noticed this recently also (and internally expect it to fail). -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Patrik Hägglund H Sent: 13 December 2011 08:31 To: Brendan Kirby; Evan Cheng Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] make check-all failing 18 tests with --enable-optimized I have now made

I downloaded via svn the release_30 and current version code. I am on x86_64 GNU/Linux, I am compiling with gcc 4.4.6 I compiled release_30 with make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=0 OPTIMIZE_OPTION=-O0 and current release with make In both cases, when I make check-all I get : FAIL: Clang :: Preprocessor/macro_paste_c_block_comment.c (2562 of 9598) ******************** TEST 'Clang ::

Hi all, Has anyone noticed the test/Regression/CodeGen/Generic/2003-05-28- ManyArgs.ll test-point hanging? It was running for several minutes on my machine before I killed it. I looked at it in the debugger and it seems to be doing the legalizing of the selection DAG forever. I looked at the Bugzilla database and didn't see a bug listed for this. Is it known? Is it really hanging or

I downloaded via svn the release_30 and current version code. I am on x86_64 GNU/Linux, I am compiling with gcc 4.4.6 I compiled release_30 with make ENABLE_OPTIMIZED=0 OPTIMIZE_OPTION=-O0 and current release with make In both cases, when I make check-all I get : FAIL: Clang :: Preprocessor/macro_paste_c_block_comment.c (2562 of 9598) ******************** TEST 'Clang ::

Hi All, I am working on a bug in clang. I already have a fix for it and I am going through the "LLVM Testing Infrastructure Guide" to make sure I haven't broken anything else. I have few questions regarding the test suite infrastructure that I hope someone can answer. 1. I checked out and built llvm, clang, and test-suite from svn tip. When I run llvm/test *without* my changes on

Hi Simona, these failures are due to the name of the path to LLVM/clang, see below. > /scratch/user/download/release_30/build/Debug/bin/clang -cc1 -internal-isystem > /scratch/user/download/release_30/build/Debug/bin/../lib/clang/3.0/include > /scratch/user/download/release_30/llvm/tools/clang/test/Preprocessor/macro_paste_c_block_comment.c > > > -Eonly 2>&1 | not grep

> > 1. I checked out and built llvm, clang, and test-suite from svn tip. > When I > > run llvm/test *without* my changes on x86, I see 3 failures. Is it > expected? > > I was expecting svn tip on x86 to be clean. Is there a nightly > regression > > result available somewhere that I can check for broken tests. Here is > the > > report from my log: > >

On Jul 27, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Sundeep wrote: > Hi All, > > I am working on a bug in clang. I already have a fix for it and I am going > through the "LLVM Testing Infrastructure Guide" to make sure I haven't > broken anything else. I have few questions regarding the test suite > infrastructure that I hope someone can answer. > > 1. I checked out and built

On Jul 28, 2011, at 8:18 AM, Sundeep wrote: >>> 1. I checked out and built llvm, clang, and test-suite from svn tip. >> When I >>> run llvm/test *without* my changes on x86, I see 3 failures. Is it >> expected? >>> I was expecting svn tip on x86 to be clean. Is there a nightly >> regression >>> result available somewhere that I can check for

Is it ok sending this results for FreeBSD5.1 at daily/weekly based to this mail list? Now results. Big improvement in llvm tests results from last test result sended. New regressions: Regression.Assembler.ConstantExprFold : FAIL , expected PASS Regression.CodeGen.Generic.2004-04-09-SameValueCoalescing: FAIL , expected PASS Regression.Transforms.PRE.basictest : FAIL

Thanks Vladimir. That's great! Glad you got it working. BTW, the failures you're seeing have been experienced by Chris and I as well. Chris is diligently working on making the LLVM processing more consistent so he track down the problem. A week ago or so, these tests passed at 100%. Reid. On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 15:50, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: > In attached file. > > Vladimir

In attached file. Vladimir -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: test2004_06_20.log Type: application/octet-stream Size: 88488 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20040620/98042f01/attachment.obj>

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Vladimir Merzliakov wrote: > Is it ok sending this results for FreeBSD5.1 at daily/weekly based to this > mail list? A better list for it would be the llvmbugs list for now. I beginning to think that we need a new test results mailing list. We have 3 instances of the nightly tester going now (x86/linux, sparc, ppc) and may have more in the future. The nightly tester