similar to: [Progress Update] LLVM Runtimes Subdirectory

On 26 August 2016 at 23:22, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Woot! Compiling RT as we speak... :) Right, all went well until I got this: [0/1] Re-running CMake... -- Builtin supported architectures: i386;x86_64 -- Configuring done -- Generating done -- Build files have been written to: /home/rengolin/devel/llvm/workdir/libs/build/runtimes/builtins-bins ninja: no work

> On Aug 26, 2016, at 3:22 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > > On 26 August 2016 at 22:45, Chris Bieneman via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Recently, I’ve made a handful of new changes that actually make it useful, and I wanted to blast out this update and encourage people to give it a try. > > Woot! Compiling RT as we

> On Dec 18, 2016, at 3:48 AM, Dmitry Golovin <dima at golovin.in> wrote: > > > > 16.12.2016, 18:23, "Vedant Kumar" <vsk at apple.com>: >>> On Dec 16, 2016, at 7:06 AM, Dmitry Golovin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> I want to build LLVM-based toolchain with Musl, I have LLVM sources with clang and

16.12.2016, 18:23, "Vedant Kumar" <vsk at apple.com>: >>  On Dec 16, 2016, at 7:06 AM, Dmitry Golovin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >>  I want to build LLVM-based toolchain with Musl, I have LLVM sources with clang and lld (under `tools` directory) and libunwind, compiler-rt, libcxx and libcxxabi (under `projects` directory). All are

Moving to llvm-dev (I think this has gone a bit further than a patch review discussion) In hindsight I probably should have explained more of my thinking on this with the patch, or done an RFC on llvm-dev to start with. I’l do that now, and answer the questions along the way. I sent a separate email discussing Justin’s patch review feedback. In the build system today there is no strong

Hey Ben, Thank you for providing this feedback. I’m going to lay out some ideas that I have inline below. > On Jun 9, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Craig, Ben via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I'm great with moving the runtimes into their own directory and making cmake modules to standardize an interface between the LLVM build process and the runtime build process. I

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 6/05/2016 - 6/11/2016. Thanks Galina buildername | was_red -----------------------------------------------------------+----------- sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap | 134:12:25 perf-x86_64-penryn-O3-polly-parallel-fast | 46:29:26

Thanks Shoaib for a great summary. To summarize this as an answer to Louis' questions: 1. What is a "Standalone build"? What does it enable that a normal monorepo build can't? This means building any of the runtimes separately, where the runtime's CMakeLists.txt (e.g. path/to/my/llvm-project/libcxx/CMakeLists.txt) is the top-level one. The reason for using this variant is

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the last week of 9/25/2016 - 10/1/2016. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the last week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed

> On Dec 16, 2016, at 7:06 AM, Dmitry Golovin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I want to build LLVM-based toolchain with Musl, I have LLVM sources with clang and lld (under `tools` directory) and libunwind, compiler-rt, libcxx and libcxxabi (under `projects` directory). All are the latest versions cloned from GitHub mirror, branch `master`. > > I'm

It seems to me that the feedback here has been generally positive, but a lot of different ideas have been added to the mix. To focus conversation and move things along I'm going to provide a summary of changes with proposals for rollout. Splitting Compiler-RT If we want to split compiler-rt, which I think makes a lot of sense, I think the best path forward is to copy the trunk (via svn cp).

Hello everyone, Below are some buildbot numbers for the week of 7/10/2016 - 7/16/2016. Please see the same data in attached csv files: The longest time each builder was red during the week; "Status change ratio" by active builder (percent of builds that changed the builder status from greed to red or from red to green); Count of commits by project; Number of completed builds, failed

[Cross-post to llvm-dev to make sure everybody relevant sees this] Hi, I'm currently trying to simplify the libc++/libc++abi/libunwind build systems and testing setup. In doing so, I am encountering issues related to "unusual" ways of building them. By unusual, I just mean "not the usual monorepo build with LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS". I would like to pin down what the set of

Today, there're two different locations for runtimes files within Clang's installation: compiler-rt: headers: $prefix/lib/clang/$version/include(/sanitizer) libraries: $prefix/lib/clang/$version/lib/$os/libclang_rt.$name-$arch.$ext libc++, libc++abi, libunwind: headers: $prefix/include/c++/v1 libraries: $prefix/lib/$name.$ext The scheme used by libc++, libc++abi, libunwind

I was trying to build llvm + clang with cmake cache PGO.cmake and ninja stage2. I used the 4.0.0 final tag vfrom svn. This seems to work for me. I added libcxx, libcxxabi, llld etc. And now I get the following cmake error. -- Performing Test LIBCXX_SUPPORTS_STD_EQ_CXX11_FLAG -- Performing Test LIBCXX_SUPPORTS_STD_EQ_CXX11_FLAG - Failed CMake Error at projects/libcxx/CMakeLists.txt:396

I want to build LLVM-based toolchain with Musl, I have LLVM sources with clang and lld (under `tools` directory) and libunwind, compiler-rt, libcxx and libcxxabi (under `projects` directory). All are the latest versions cloned from GitHub mirror, branch `master`. I'm trying to configure with the following options: CLANG_DEFAULT_CXX_STDLIB = libc++ CLANG_DEFAULT_RTLIB = compiler-rt

Sorry for the delay in writing this up and sending it out, but I wanted to recap the discussion from the roundtable on October 23rd. The roundtable ran for almost two hours and we discussed at most of the main points in my RFC. Thank you everyone who participated and contributed to the discussion! TL;DR: We should move to CMake 3.15 (RFC incoming). We should make `all` really `all`. We should

Hi. Failure 1: Current clang-6.0 from http://apt.llvm.org/, current sources. $ CC=clang-6.0 CXX=clang++-6.0 cmake -DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS="clang;libcxx;libcxxabi;compiler-rt;lld;polly;openmp" -DLLVM_USE_SANITIZER="Address;Undefined" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -GNinja ../llvm $ ninja [200/3921] Building Attributes.gen... FAILED: include/llvm/IR/Attributes.gen.tmp cd

Hi llvm-dev, I'm trying to figure out how to contribute to LLVM, in particular a followup to kcc's commit 6bde702a in sanitzer_suppressions.cc. However I can't find a way to get the tests to run before I even change anything. The relevant unit test is compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/tests/sanitizer_suppressions_test.cc, so I expect I want `ninja check-asan` (right?). Here's what

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:33 AM Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com> wrote: > On 12/19/17 9:15 AM, Petr Hosek via llvm-dev wrote: > > Today, there're two different locations for runtimes files within > > Clang's installation: > > > > compiler-rt: > > headers: $prefix/lib/clang/$version/include(/sanitizer) > > libraries: >