similar to: [LLVMdev] 3.5.1 Testing Phase II Begins

I've uploaded clang+llvm-3.5.1-rc2-mips-linux-gnu.tar.xz and clang+llvm-3.5.1-rc2-mipsel-linux-gnu.tar.xz. The latter fails prune.m in 'make check-all' as it did last time but this is because the 'touch -a' command isn't actually changing the access timestamp. I've started the test-suite for both of them. ________________________________________ From: llvmdev-bounces

The most relevant of these is r222856 which reverted a set of broken optimizations in r210006. I'd be happy with just including r222856. Optionally, we could take r222868 and r222871 which correctly restore the optimization. On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > Hey Tom, > > David has pointed out to me that we have some *really*

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 09:27:32PM +0000, Daniel Sanders wrote: > clang+llvm-3.5.1-rc2-mips-linux-gnu.tar.xz: > All ok for default options and -mips32. > > clang+llvm-3.5.1-rc2-mipsel-linux-gnu.tar.xz: > All ok for default options. > It will take a couple days to get results for the -mips32 test-suite (there's no FPU or local disk on this machine so some tests

You're not the only one Hans, my VMs have started crashing my host OS :) Fedora and OpenSUSE look good, binaries uploaded. On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > 3.5.1-rc1 has been tagged, so it is time to begin testing. We

Hi, 3.5.1-rc1 has been tagged, so it is time to begin testing. We can always use more testers, so if you would like to volunteer, let me know. For those that are new to testing, please review the documentation for how validate a new release: http://llvm.org/docs/ReleaseProcess.html Remember that when we check for regressions we want to compare the test results of 3.5.1-rc1 with 3.5.0-final.

On Thursday, January 15, 2015 06:55 AM, Nikola Smiljanic wrote: > Was there an rc3 that I missed? > It's not tagged if there was. I've tested and uploaded 3.5.1 final for x86_64-ubuntu-14.04. I think the rc2 build required a newer libstdc++ than exists on Ubuntu 14.04, but the final build should be good. Ben

Hi testers! 3.6.0-rc1 was just tagged, so testing can begin. I'm not super familiar with the testing script yet, but I believe the idea is to run it as follows: $ utils/release/test-release.sh -release 3.6.0 -rc 1 -triple x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu With the -triple value substituted for your platform. Bill's 3.5rc1 email also said 'test-suite' needs to be run by hand. Please

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 07:44:20PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 26 Nov 2014, at 16:50, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:15:13AM +0000, Daniel Sanders wrote: > ... > > I will try to look at the patches today. I'm going to delay the release a week > > or so, because of all the merge requests I've received,

Many of them are already live: http://llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.5 On 15/01/2015 01:50, Nikola Smiljanic wrote: > In that case are we supposed to build final binaries for 3.5.1? > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Ben Pope <benpope81 at gmail.com > <mailto:benpope81 at gmail.com>> wrote: > > > On Thursday, January 15, 2015 06:55 AM, Nikola Smiljanic

> Just for the record: http://reviews.llvm.org/D6812 fixes most of these big- > endian N32 failures but we should stick to the current plan because I haven't > retested the other ABI's yet. > All but one of the remaining failures is due a qemu bug. The linux user mode > emulation of struct target_stat doesn't quite match any supported by glibc and > causes certain

Hi, One issue that has come up in the process of merging patches to the 3.5 branch is whether or not it is OK to add new symbols to 3.5.1 that weren't included in 3.5.0. My understanding is that if new symbols are added to 3.5.1, then programs built against 3.5.0 will still be able to link against 3.5.1, however programs built against 3.5.1 will fail to link against 3.5.0. My initial

2014-12-15 13:00 GMT+01:00 Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com>: >> LLVM: CodeGen/Mips/cconv/arguments-struct.ll > > Do you have the verbose lit output for this test? > I ran it again in verbose mode, but there were no additional outputs. Cheers, Sebastian

> On 15.12.2014, at 15:45, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] >> On Behalf Of Sebastian Dreßler >> Sent: 15 December 2014 14:08 >> Cc: Ben Pope; Nikola Smiljanic; llvmdev >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] 3.5.1 Testing Phase

Yeah, I was just puzzled :D No worries. Cheers, Sebastian 2014-12-16 11:09 GMT+01:00 Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com>: > It looks like I missed that email completely, I started out replying to > Nikola and Hans which is why I was talking about Windows rather than OS X. > > > > I've just found your first email in my llvmdev folder and I think I see what

It looks like I missed that email completely, I started out replying to Nikola and Hans which is why I was talking about Windows rather than OS X. I've just found your first email in my llvmdev folder and I think I see what happened. My mail rules deliver llvmdev messages to a folder named llvmdev unless I'm directly addressed in which case it delivers to my inbox. It looks like you

On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 11:51:07AM -0800, Michael Zolotukhin wrote: > Hi Tom, > > I also have several patches that might be useful in 3.5.1. They all are stability fixes: > > r221009: Correctly update dom-tree after loop vectorizer. > r222451: Fix a trip-count overflow issue in LoopUnroll. > r223170 and r223171: PR21302.Vectorize only bottom-tested loops. > Hi Arnold,

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:34:34PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 29 Nov 2014, at 02:48, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 07:44:20PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > ... > >> I would like to propose the following additional patches for 3.5.1. These will already be part of the upcoming clang 3.5.0 import into the FreeBSD 11.0 base

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dimitry Andric" <dimitry at andric.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List (llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu)" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>, "Tom Stellard" <tom at stellard.net> > Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 1:34:21 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 04:28:55PM +0000, Renato Golin wrote: > On 31 January 2015 at 00:42, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > > 3.6.0-rc2 was just tagged. Please test and build binaries. > > Hi Hans, > > I just built RC2 with the patch that fixes the NEON builds on ARM and > uploaded to the FTP site. It checks-all clean, but I'm running the >

No regressions this time. Fedora and OpenSUSE binaries uploaded. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote: > Dropping llvmdev and cc'ing testers directly, so this email > won't be held in moderation for having too many recipients. > > I like having tester discussions on list, so it would probably > be best to reply to the original