Displaying 20 results from an estimated 40000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] test-suite"
2012 Dec 12
0
[LLVMdev] test-suite
I run the test suite by CD-ing into /projects/test-suite and running "make TEST=simple -j 4".
On Dec 12, 2012, at 10:13 AM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to run test-suite for x86 in order to verify a target independent patch before I put it back.
> The patch has been approved.
>
> What is the best way to run it in order to get maximum
2012 Dec 15
3
[LLVMdev] test-suite
I have an approved target independent putback and i've run all that we
have at Mips as well as on x86 " make TEST=simple"
Is there anything else that is easy to run that I can do before doing
the commit?
The patch touches a number of basic classes so I'm just trying to err on
the side of caution.
2012 Dec 12
2
[LLVMdev] test-suite
On 12/12/2012 10:18 AM, Nadav Rotem wrote:
> I run the test suite by CD-ing into /projects/test-suite and running "make TEST=simple -j 4".
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2012, at 10:13 AM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to run test-suite for x86 in order to verify a target independent patch before I put it back.
>> The patch has been
2012 Dec 15
0
[LLVMdev] test-suite
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
> I have an approved target independent putback and i've run all that we
> have at Mips as well as on x86 " make TEST=simple"
>
> Is there anything else that is easy to run that I can do before doing the
> commit?
>
> The patch touches a number of basic classes so I'm just
2012 Dec 16
1
[LLVMdev] test-suite
On 12/15/2012 12:53 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com
> <mailto:rkotler at mips.com>> wrote:
>
> I have an approved target independent putback and i've run all
> that we have at Mips as well as on x86 " make TEST=simple"
>
> Is there anything else that is easy to run that I
2011 Nov 07
4
[LLVMdev] test-suite failures
We have a modified version of projects/test-suite that we can run cross
using Qemu.
We would like to put that back so that other people can test MIPS
before putting back.
Well, this would be easily modifiable for ARM and other targets that are
supported by QEMU.
But in this case, we would need to check in a version of QEMU and also
the needed pieces of a MIPS tool chain for assembly,
2012 Dec 16
1
[LLVMdev] test-suite
On 12/15/2012 12:53 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Reed Kotler <rkotler at mips.com
> <mailto:rkotler at mips.com>> wrote:
>
> I have an approved target independent putback and i've run all
> that we have at Mips as well as on x86 " make TEST=simple"
>
> Is there anything else that is easy to run that I
2012 Jun 05
4
[LLVMdev] technical debt
On 06/04/2012 05:17 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> Can we get back to the substantive discussion about your ideas for
> lessening the technical debt?
The lessening requires enlisting people that are willing to do this as
opposed to doing fun science like cool optimization. I,for example, find
the documentaiton, cleanup and refactoring to be interesting so I don't
feel cheated to work on
2012 Jun 05
0
[LLVMdev] technical debt
FWIW, I'm putting together (hopefully to be done by the end of this
weekend) a substantial refactoring of the TableGen backend API along with
shiny new documentation (reStructuredText with sphinx) of all of TableGen,
including documentation about how to write backends and---depending on how
adventurous I get---a more detailed coverage of the syntax.
Also, Reed, in your TableGen talk, IIRC,
2012 Jun 05
2
[LLVMdev] technical debt
Hi Sean,
Glad to hear there is clean up of tablegen going on.
Just for the record, I don't know what you are referring to regarding
some comment of mine
at my talk about 10K LOC.
I don't know how big tablegen is itself nor how much code has been
written in it so I would not have ventured such a guess.
The idea of totally replacing the tablegen language came up at the talk
during the
2012 Dec 13
2
[LLVMdev] failures in test-suite for make TEST=simple
The first one failed on a diff:
******************** TEST (simple) 'sse.expandfft' FAILED!
********************
Execution Context Diff:
/home/rkotler/llvmpb3/build/projects/test-suite/tools/fpcmp: Compared:
1.139094e-07 and 1.159249e-07
abs. diff = 2.015500e-09 rel.diff = 1.738626e-02
Out of tolerance: rel/abs: 1.600000e-02/0.000000e+00
******************** TEST (simple)
2012 Dec 13
1
[LLVMdev] failures in test-suite for make TEST=simple
I use the 'make TEST=simple' as a pre-commit test. I think that everybody should run these tests before committing to LLVM.
On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:06 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
> when I create the report, there are no failures in it. so maybe these are being filtered for known failures.
>
> On 12/12/2012 05:03 PM, reed kotler wrote:
>> The first
2012 Dec 13
0
[LLVMdev] failures in test-suite for make TEST=simple
when I create the report, there are no failures in it. so maybe these
are being filtered for known failures.
On 12/12/2012 05:03 PM, reed kotler wrote:
> The first one failed on a diff:
> ******************** TEST (simple) 'sse.expandfft' FAILED!
> ********************
> Execution Context Diff:
> /home/rkotler/llvmpb3/build/projects/test-suite/tools/fpcmp: Compared:
>
2012 Jun 05
0
[LLVMdev] technical debt
I definitely trust what you say now with time to think at your keyboard
over what you said on the spot in a live presentation. The comment that I
was referring to was:
36:44 of http://llvm.org/devmtg/2012-04-12/videos/Reed_Kotler-mobile.mov
"there's not really more than a couple thousand lines of .td ... I mean
there's not tons of this code so if we had to use a different one I
2014 Feb 25
3
[LLVMdev] configure with clang vs gcc
On 02/25/2014 02:38 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:32 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
>> On 02/25/2014 09:30 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>> reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> writes:
>>>> On 02/24/2014 04:42 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:40 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at
2012 Aug 20
2
[LLVMdev] unit tests
I wanted to add some unit tests for MIPS. They are usable by other
platforms but may require modification to make them universal.
Do we have a way to add use google test as part of the llvm test suite?
It's checked in to the
source.
Or would I just add them to the single source tests and fix the make
files to have them be Mips only?
2014 Feb 25
2
[LLVMdev] configure with clang vs gcc
I see what my problem is here....
I'll continue to move further.
Seems like Richards fix is still okay.
On 02/25/2014 02:42 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:41 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
>> On 02/25/2014 02:38 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:32 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
2012 Jun 28
2
[LLVMdev] recursing llvm
Okay. Cool.
So do you bootrstrap and verify as part of the usual testing?
Do the nightly scripts do this?
Reed
On 06/28/2012 11:08 AM, Eric Christopher wrote:
> On Jun 27, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Reed Kotler<rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
>
>> On 06/27/2012 05:00 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
>>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 5:24 PM, reed kotler<rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
2011 Nov 08
1
[LLVMdev] test-suite failures
On 11/07/2011 02:29 PM, Eli Friedman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:11 PM, reed kotler<rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
>> We have a modified version of projects/test-suite that we can run cross
>> using Qemu.
>>
>> We would like to put that back so that other people can test MIPS
>> before putting back.
>> Well, this would be easily modifiable for ARM
2014 Feb 25
3
[LLVMdev] configure with clang vs gcc
On 02/24/2014 04:42 PM, Eric Christopher wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:40 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote:
>> I need to leave soon and will take a look in the morning.
>>
>> I did look at the autoconf input files configure.ac
>>
>> There is a disable-zlib but not a disable-valgrind, even though it seems
>> like there used to be.