similar to: [LLVMdev] Help needed about setting up an Aarch64 LLVM buildbot

Hi Tim, I just read this thread and I see that you mentioned the buildbot and my name. > - LLVM test suite enabled in the buildbot and testing ARM64 (Gabor) What exactly I can do to help you with the merge process? Best regards, Gabor Ballabas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 10.02.2015 13:51, Gabor Ballabas wrote: > Hi Andy, > > I have a question regarding the submission deadline. > We plan to create and bring a poster to the conference about the > LLVM-related work of our University (University of Szeged, Hungary). > Do we have to upload the full poster before the deadline or would an > abstract be enough for the evaluation process? An

Hi, I've got the same 4 unexpected passing tests on the AArch64 buildbot. I checked the buildbot logs and before these tests started to fail all MCJIT tests were unsupported. I think that maybe this commit - http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?revision=193459&view=revision <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?revision=193459&view=revision> caused the issue but I'm still

Hi All, I started to work on code-size improvements on ARM target by comparing GCC and LLVM generated code. My first candidate was switch-case lowering. I also created a Bugzilla issue for this topic: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34902 The full example code and the generated assembly for GCC and for LLVM is in the Bugzilla issue. My first idea was to simplify the following

Hi, Testing llvm trunk on openSUSE 13.1 ARMv7 I got 4 unexpected passes: Unexpected Passing Tests (4): LLVM :: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/cross-module-sm-pic-a.ll LLVM :: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/multi-module-sm-pic-a.ll LLVM :: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/cross-module-sm-pic-a.ll LLVM :: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/remote/multi-module-sm-pic-a.ll And one FAIL: Failing Tests (1): LLVM ::

Hi everyone, I just upgraded to Samba 1.9.18p4, and the default service seems to be broken. Here is the relevant part of the log file (with level 5): Trying username dosfileS checking for home directory dosfiles gave (NULL) Allowed connection from makayg.math.u-szeged.hu (160.114.33.2) to dosfiles Trying username dosfileS 04/07/1998 09:50:21 invalid username/password for dosfiles Allowed

Hi Gabor, It seems the linker is playing tricks on the full bot: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-native-aarch64-full Sometimes it works by cleaning the stage2 dir completely, but there may be some extra bits that we're not considering. However, I can't see why any of the commits on the first failure did anything to the relocations on AArhc64... cheers, --renato

Hi everyone, It seems to me that smbpasswd does not work for normal users in Samba version 1.9.18p4. If I invoke it as root, then there is no problem with it, but if I invoke it as a normal user, then I get the following: $ smbpasswd -D 99 Old SMB password: New SMB password: Retype new SMB password: Connecting to 127.0.0.1 at port 139 write_socket(3,76) write_socket(3,76) wrote 76 Sent session

Hi Gabor, I noticed that one particular test fails intermittently on the AArch64 bot: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-native-aarch64-full FAIL: Profile:: instrprof-set-filename-then-reset-default.c Some times on stage1, others on stage2, others no fail at all. All the commits during these builds are not related to profiling or AArch64, so I believe this has something to do with the

On Apr 2, 2008, at 9:54 AM, Dominic Hamon wrote: > Hello llvm dev peeps > > I would like to use an LLVMBuilder pointer as a base pointer to > reference either an LLVMBuilder or an LLVMFoldingBuilder. As the > methods > in the Folding builder have the same names as the base class, I > thought > about submitting a patch whereby the base class methods would become >

I used &Idx[0]. In future, please avoid tabs in your patch. I applied your patch. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20071217/056403.html - Devang On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:57 AM, Richard Pennington wrote: > Devang Patel wrote: >> On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: >>> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and

I just checked in a new LLVMBuilder class into llvm/Support/LLVMBuilder.h, and switched llvm-gcc over to use it. This class is based on feedback Tom Tromey gave on LLVM way back here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2006-April/005581.html Basically, when creating a frontend, you end up creating a lot of instructions. This has three suboptimal aspects to it: 1. The constructors

Hi, the functionality of LLVMFoldingBuilder has been folded into LLVMBuilder, which has been renamed to IRBuilder. If you were using LLVMFoldingBuilder then it should be enough to rename LLVMFoldingBuilder to IRBuilder everywhere (and change the #include from LLVMBuilder to IRBuilder). If you were using LLVMBuilder then as well as renaming LLVMBuilder to IRBuilder you may also need to fix up the

Hello llvm dev peeps I would like to use an LLVMBuilder pointer as a base pointer to reference either an LLVMBuilder or an LLVMFoldingBuilder. As the methods in the Folding builder have the same names as the base class, I thought about submitting a patch whereby the base class methods would become virtual. However, the base class methods return specific types while the Folding builder, for

> > Ah! This is the one that's messing up. Could someone take a look at > this and see why it's failing? It doesn't even seem to be getting to > the "svn" checkout. > > Hi Bill, [sorry I was not subscribed to llvm-testresults, and noticed this only now] This is a buildbot bug apparently, see http://buildbot.net/trac/ticket/284 and

On Sun, 27 May 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: >> I just checked in a new LLVMBuilder class into llvm/Support/LLVMBuilder.h, > It does not seem to be on the LLVM cvsweb, is that still showing 1.9 or 2.0 > and not cvs ? It is there: http://llvm.org/cvsweb/cvsweb.cgi/llvm/include/llvm/Support/LLVMBuilder.h?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/

> On Sun, 27 May 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: >>> I just checked in a new LLVMBuilder class into >>> llvm/Support/LLVMBuilder.h, >> It does not seem to be on the LLVM cvsweb, is that still showing 1.9 or >> 2.0 >> and not cvs ? > > It is there: >

> I am trying to compile llvm gcc 4.0 from svn today and I'm getting the > error below. It looks like the file LLVMBuilder.h. I looked in past > versions of LLVM and that file exists; however, it not longer seams to > exist. Has it purposely been removed? llvm-gcc 4.0 is no longer supported (as of 2.2): http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-February/012416.html To

>> On Sun, 27 May 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: >>>> I just checked in a new LLVMBuilder class into >>>> llvm/Support/LLVMBuilder.h, >>> It does not seem to be on the LLVM cvsweb, is that still showing 1.9 or >>> 2.0 >>> and not cvs ? >> >> It is there: >>

Duncan Sands wrote: >> Another option that was discussed in #llvm is to nuke LLVMBuilder and >> rename LLVMFoldingBuilder to LLVMBuilder. If this was the case, I'd >> argue for a flag in the Builder that could retain the old non-folding >> functionality for debugging purposes. >> > > this plan sounds good to me. However it's not clear to me how