similar to: [4.0 Release] Schedule and call for testers

Hello everyone, It's time to start planning for the 3.9 release. Please let me know if you'd like to help providing binaries and testing for your favourite platform. I propose the following schedule: - 18 July: Create the release branch; build and test RC1 soon thereafter. - 1 August: Tag, build and test RC2. Any unfinished features need to be turned off by now. As we get closer to

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 05 Dec 2016, at 19:26, Hans Wennborg via Openmp-dev <openmp-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> There's still plenty of time left, but I'd like to get the schedule >> set before folks start disappearing for the holidays. >> >> Note that this release will also

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 5 December 2016 at 19:56, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: >> I'd like to avoid 4.1 because of the potential for confusion about >> whether it's a major release (as it would have been under the old >> scheme) or a patch release. > > But if the versioning

Dear everyone, It's not quite time to start the 3.8 release process, but it's time to start planning. Please let me know if you want to help with testing and building release binaries for your favourite platform. (If you were a tester on the previous release, you're cc'd on this email.) I propose the following schedule for the 3.8 release: - 13 January: Create 3.8 branch.

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 5 December 2016 at 18:56, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers > <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> The idea is that Tom's stable releases will keep incrementing the >> "patch" part of the version numbers, just as today, so they would be >> 4.0.1, 4.0.2,

Hello everyone, Please let me know if you'd like to help providing binaries and testing for your favourite platform. If you were a tester on the previous release, I've bcc'd you on this email. I propose this schedule for the 3.7 release: - 14 July 2015: Create the release branch. - 14 July -- 21 July: Testing Phase I. RC1 binaries are built and tested. - 22 July -- 29 July: Fix

Daniel, Note the openmp library only has cmake build machinery preventing autoconf-based builds. Jack On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'll do Mips as usual. Are we going to do an autoconf-based build for LLVM 3.7? If so, I might try Mips64 packages too. > >> -----Original

Hello everyone, I know 7.0.1 isn't out the door yet, and 8.0.0 isn't due for a while, so relax :-) But I would like to get the schedule decided before folks disappear over the holidays. According to the usual schedule, the branch would be created two weeks into January, with the goal of shipping early March, so this is my proposal: - 16 January 2019: Create the 8.0.0 branch, RC1 tagged

Hello everyone, Source, binaries and docs for LLVM-5.0.0-rc2 are now available at http://prereleases.llvm.org/5.0.0/#rc2 (I'll add more binaries as they become available.) Please try it out, run tests, builds your favourite projects and file bugs about anything that needs to be fixed (including docs!), marking them blockers of http://llvm.org/pr33849. Cheers, Hans

Thanks! Can you post the sha1's for the files you uploaded? Windows and Mac look good. Uploaded: ca26fbfabb54ac1f70776ab3a5503313ec518f18 clang+llvm-3.9.0-rc2-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz 26d616e1355dc0802f90babbd5ea0b72abc0c0bb LLVM-3.9.0-rc2-win32.exe 42363aeaff395d442f418d77b542a088b5b0658b LLVM-3.9.0-rc2-win64.exe Thanks, Hans On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Diana Picus <diana.picus

I'm not aware of a bug filed for this, so please file one. I don't know much about the workings of test-suite myself, though. On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Brian Cain <brian.cain at gmail.com> wrote: > Much or all of "Bitcode/simd_ops/simd_ops_*.test" (254 failures) seem to be > failing for me with SIGILL. I'm guessing that my host CPU doesn't support

rc1 did not exhibit this mismatch. A repeat of the rc2 build repeated the mismatch. I diff'd the disassembly between phase 2 and phase 3 and the difference is the same on both builds. The difference follows: # diff x86isel_p{2,3}.s 2c2 < Phase2/Release/llvmCore-8.0.0-rc2.obj/lib/Target/X86/CMakeFiles/LLVMX86CodeGen.dir/X86ISelLowering.cpp.o: file format elf64-x86-64 --- >

It's a test for the new interceptor for prlimit. It could be disabled with __GLIBC_PREREQ for 2.13+. On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > +Evgenii for msan. > > I suspect the community simply doesn't keep track of what glibc > version is required :-/ > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Brian Cain <brian.cain at

When I tested rc1 I found that some of the test suite wouldn't build on SLES11.3 as a consequence of changes to the tests. At least some of the msan tests have been changed leverage features of glibc newer than is available on this platform. I asked about a minimum-required glibc but didn't hear back. Is the minimum required glibc for 3.9 different from 3.8? When I tried rc1 on

Committed to 11.x as b6efbd6b5f22d0a251d2fba9a5d24ac21760b1cc. Thanks! On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 3:29 AM Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Hans, > > Apologies if I got here too late, but just in case I didn't here are some JIT release notes for 11.0.0: > > - LLJIT now supports execution of static inits / deinits via the LLJIT::initialize and

On 7 Feb 2018, at 21:51, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > There's been a lot of merges since rc1, and hopefully the tests are in > a better state now. > > 6.0.0-rc2 was just tagged, after r324506. > > Please test, let me know how it goes, and upload binaries. Built, tested and uploaded: SHA256

Thanks! Committed in 158581772fc8f3d6c601ceba14a08285e46cb7e9 On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 4:23 PM Ahsan Saghir <saghir.ibm at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Hans, > Here are the PowerPC release notes for 11.0.0: > > Optimization: > > Improved Loop Unroll-and-Jam legality checks, allowing it to handle more than two level loop nests > Improved Loop Unroll to be able

Hi Hans, I'm seeing one unexpected failure: libc++ :: std/input.output/stream.buffers/streambuf/streambuf.protected/streambuf.put.area/pbump2gig.pass.cpp Test logs show: Standard Error: -- terminating with uncaught exception of type std::length_error: basic_string -- but only on my big endian MIPS machine. I have filed PR36373 for the above failure. I've looked at the failures

Dear testers, 8.0.0-rc3 was just tagged from the release_80 branch at r355015. We're running a little behind schedule now, but I think we're also close to be able to call this done. Please take a close look at this release candidate. Unless anything bad comes up, this is probably very similar to what the final release will look like. Testers, please run the test script, share your

Dear testers, 5.0.0-rc3 was just tagged. This is a release candidate in the real sense: if nothing bad comes up in testing, this is what the release is going to look like. Please build, test and upload binaries to the sftp (use the /data/testers-uploads/ directory) and let me know what issues remain. I know we're a little bit behind schedule, but hopefully we can get to 'final'