similar to: [LLVMdev] Failures on clang-mergefunc-x86_64-freeBSD9.2

> Chandler’s complex arithmetic changes are also in the range: r219557 in clang. We saw it change the code in mandel-2 significantly. mandel-2 is broken on hard FP ABI systems, btw. The reason is simply: we're emitting a call to __muldc3 with AAPCS VFP calling convention, however, the function expects softfp (AAPCS) calling conv and reads garbage from GP registers. I'm working on fix.

Hello; I was able to build and install llvm(3.0) under Ubuntu 11.10 (using the ./configure script found under llvm source, and then make and make install). While configuring, I gave --prefix as a directory where I would like llvm to be installed. I did not give --with-llvmgccdir and the --enable-optimized argument to configure. Because 3.0 doesn't come with llvmgcc source/binaries and I

Dale, I took a closer look at the first llc failure, initp1. Looking at the initp1.llc file in gdb, it appears that the statically constructed objects without the init_priority attribute are being constructed before those with it, though the test seems to expect the opposite. The initp1.llc.s file seems to have the .ctors table in the right order, but the _init code is reading the table in

On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Ivan A. Kosarev <ivan at ivan-labs.com> wrote: > Hi Alexey, > > > On 03/31/2014 09:58 PM, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > On FreeBSD 9.2 I add a couple custom options to CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS in order > to let clang know which header set it should use, like that: > >> >>> CC=clang CXX=clang++ cmake \ >>>

On Aug 30, 2010, at 3:11 PMPDT, John Thompson wrote: > Dale, > > I took a closer look at the first llc failure, initp1. Looking at > the initp1.llc file in gdb, it appears that the statically > constructed objects without the init_priority attribute are being > constructed before those with it, though the test seems to expect > the opposite. > > The

I'm close to confirming that I get the equivalent results from the test-suite with my changes, compared to a fresh tree, on a Linux x86 64 bit box. When that is the case, may I check in my current changes for the LLVM side? My preference is to develop the mult-alt support incrementally, rather than one big check-in, as I get nervous sitting on a lot of changes for a long time. I feel this

Is there code available to decompose interactions involving at least one nominal factor with more than 2 levels as described, e.g., by Tukey or by Mandel (1971, Technometrics, 13: 1-18)? Tukey's model: E(y[i,j]) = mu0 + a[i] + b[j] + c*a[i]*b[j], estimating a, b, and c so sum(a) = sum(b)= 0. Mandel essentially describes a singular value decomposition of the interaction. Thanks,

On Sep 1, 2010, at 11:03 AMPDT, John Thompson wrote: > I'm close to confirming that I get the equivalent results from the > test-suite with my changes, compared to a fresh tree, on a Linux x86 > 64 bit box. > > When that is the case, may I check in my current changes for the > LLVM side? In principle, yes, I'd like to rereview if it's changed. > My

Dale, Thanks. It's not changed, but I've enclosed a fresh patch against today's trunk. However, I'm seeing 28 unexpected failing tests in llvm/test on x86 Linux 64 today. But it's the same on an unmodified tree, so I guess I'm still okay. It passed at one point for me with these changes. -John On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple.com>

Actually the 2.8 fork is coming up tomorrow and I'm thinking maybe we should wait until after that. Is this something you really want to get in 2.8? On Sep 1, 2010, at 6:29 PMPDT, John Thompson wrote: > Dale, > > Thanks. It's not changed, but I've enclosed a fresh patch against > today's trunk. > However, I'm seeing 28 unexpected failing tests in

Hi Ivan, On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Ivan A. Kosarev <ivan at ivan-labs.com> wrote: > Hi Alexey, > > > On 03/27/2014 04:35 PM, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > Here's the reason why I've made this change: > > http://llvm.1065342.n5.nabble.com/compiler-rt-CMake-build-ignores-CMAKE-CXX-FLAGS-tp67022.html > > > OK, thanks. > > BTW, should we CC

Dear R users, I have some trouble using the allEffects() function to compute and display effect plots for a linear model. My data is quite simple, it concerns effects of 3 treatments on the tumoral volume of mice. vTum codes for the qualitative initial volume, from small to big, temps is the time in month since beginning of treatment, and S?rie codes for the batch. Data is unbalanced. >

Hi Nick, I tried to rework changes as you requested. One of patches (0004 with extra assertions) has been removed. > + bool isEquivalentType(Type *Ty1, Type *Ty2) const { > + return cmpType(Ty1, Ty2) == 0; > + } > > Why do we still need isEquivalentType? Can we nuke this? Yup. After applying all the patches isEquivalentType will be totally replaced with cmpType. All

CBE is fairly broken everywhere AFAIK, don't worry about it. Most of the JIT failures are in tests that exercise exception handling. Not sure if that is supposed to work in your environment, it works in some JITs and not others. The LLC failures are cause for concern. On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:59 AMPDT, John Thompson wrote: > Dale, > > Thanks for reviewing this. > > I have

Greetings - I'm a user of clang (3.3), as it is the system compiler for my installation of FreeBSD. (In FreeBSD 10, it will be the default compiler, but that's not my point.) My system identifies itself as: FreeBSD 9.2-PRERELEASE #0: Tue Jul 16 13:00:08 EDT 2013 lidl at nine0:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC Recently, in preparation for the upcoming 9.2 release, they imported the llvm

Hello :-) I am installing the 9.2-RC1 bootonly iso which wants to download stuff from snapshots while it is in releases directory: Installer wants to get 9.2-RC1 stuff from here (where it is missing): ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/i386/i386/ While the stuff is at: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/i386/9.2-RC1/ Please fix :-) Best regards :-) Tomek -- CeDeROM,

Dale, Thanks for reviewing this. I have some newbie questions regarding the test-suite for you or anyone: I'm trying to run the test-suite as described in the "LLVM Testing Infrastructure Guide" on a Ubuntu x86 64 bit system. Initially I ran into problems with missing tools like yacc, which I fixed as I went along until the make at the test-suite level completed. However, I get

Hey everyone, Not sure if anyone had tried this but I managed to get LLVM and clang to build on Nexenta Alpha 7. This is an OpenSolaris/GNU OS. There wasn't much to change for LLVM, except "#undef"ing a lot of x86 register name equivalents and the like (ie. EAX,ESP,CS,FS...). There were a couple of similar undef's needed for clang, as well. The clang testsuite ran fine except

Dear Colleagues, John Mandel ( Chain block designs with two-way elimination of heterogeneity. Biometrics 10, 251-272 ,1954). extended the class of chain block designs (Youden & Conner (1953) to elimination of both row and column (blocks) effects. These experimental designs can be useful in engineering and other fields. I am having difficulty obtaining his adjusted treatment means in his

Hi Chandler, That's embarrassing how weird this part of clang is. I have a provisional patch which fixes the problem but underlines clang's problems. I will submit it tonight for comments. суббота, 18 октября 2014 г. пользователь Chandler Carruth написал: > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Anton Korobeynikov < > anton at korobeynikov.info >