similar to: [LLVMdev] Announcing 3.2 Release Schedule

IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! IMPORTANT! We will be branching for the 3.1 release on April 16th! :-) This gives us a little over two weeks to get the trees into the most stable condition we can. What this means for you: All major features for the 3.1 release should be finished or near completion by the April 16th. After April 16th, we will accept only bug fixes and patches which do not change the

On 1/11/2013 7:15 AM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > Removed from trunk. Pawel can decide if its necessary to update the > tarballs. > > Thanks for the report! Apparently git-svn does not delete removed > directories. PTX directories still exists in release_32 branch and RELEASE_32/final. But they are all empty so PTX can not be build. > > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:36

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: > >> > >> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski > >> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26

Pawel, We all understand that you're pretty new to release process, etc., but I think you should understand the implications of your actions. You just created a lot of harm for really huge pile of users - the ones who downloads the tarball via some automated build system and rely on the known good checksum. This includes, but not limited to to the users of FreeBSD, Gentoo, etc. Even worse,

Pawel, First, all your help with the 3.2 release is greatly appreciated. I do not think anyone is saying otherwise. I apologize for the lack of documentation regarding this issue. I do ask that you consult with previous release manager (myself or Bill) to determine what the best course of action is. There is a lot of room to improve our release process, but its a collaborative effort. You are

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: > > On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 11.01.2013, at 07:36, ????????? (Wei-Ren Chen) <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: > > >

On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: >> >> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski >> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer >>> <benny.kra at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 11.01.2013, at

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:47:01PM -0600, Pawel Wodnicki wrote: > On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: > >> > >> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski > >> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benjamin Kramer

On 1/11/2013 2:51 PM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > >> On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski >>>> <justin.holewinski at

Anton, > Pawel, > > We all understand that you're pretty new to release process, etc., but > I think you should understand the implications of your actions. > > You just created a lot of harm for really huge pile of users - the > ones who downloads the tarball via some automated build system and > rely on the known good checksum. This includes, but not limited to to

On 1/11/2013 3:59 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:47:01PM -0600, Pawel Wodnicki wrote: >> On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski >>>> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote:

Also you might need to check use PostRASchedulerList or PostMachineScheduler, PostRASchedulerList is considered deprecated as mentioned in [1]. [1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-April/112348.html HTH, chenwj 2017-06-10 4:03 GMT+08:00 陳韋任 <chenwj.cs97g at g2.nctu.edu.tw>: > Not saying I am totally understand how thing works, but I think you're > misleading >

Brooks, > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:47:01PM -0600, Pawel Wodnicki wrote: >> On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski >>>> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>

Akira, > Pawel, > > Is it still not too late to merge these patches? > > r168471 > r168460 > r168458 > r168456 > r168455 > r168453 > r168450 > r168448 > > These patches fix a bug in mips backend's GOT implementation and add > support for big-GOT relocations. That's quite a list of patches! To get them into the 3.2 release you would first

Hi All, I am trying to construct a small optimization based on ScheduleDAGInstrs that does the following: 1. Find candidate nodes in the DAG, and speculatively modify the node (nodes). 2. After modification, try to compute the scheduled cycles of the region. 3. If the cycle number improves, go back to 1. to find the next candidate node. I am thinking using

Pawel, Is it still not too late to merge these patches? r168471 r168460 r168458 r168456 r168455 r168453 r168450 r168448 These patches fix a bug in mips backend's GOT implementation and add support for big-GOT relocations. Thank you. On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Just a quick reminder that the November 29th

On Aug 4, 2010, at 6:01 AM, Török Edwin wrote: > On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 23:57:05 -0700 > Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > >> Good news, everybody! >> >> It's that time of year again. We are going to release LLVM 2.8! I'm >> taking over for Tanya to give her a much needed break. I can only >> hope to perform as well as she has. This

Hi all, O.K., I believe most of us already note that 3.1 release has been delayed for about a week. Is there something block the release? ;) Regards, chenwj -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任) Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.) Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667 Homepage: http://people.cs.nctu.edu.tw/~chenwj

> By the way, we are looking for ARM testers. There was a lot of interest in the 3.0 release for an ARM release. We will try to do one this release on a trial basis. We are looking for ARMv7 cortex-a8 and cortex-a9 on Linux. We have two pandard board (ARMv7 cortex-a9) and perhaps one ARMv6 4-cores board. Do we do a native compile or cross compile for the ARM platform? Regards, chenwj --

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 01:00:55PM -0600, Pawel Wodnicki wrote: > Brooks, > > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:47:01PM -0600, Pawel Wodnicki wrote: > >> On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin