similar to: [8.0.0 Release] rc1 has been tagged

On Thu, 2019-01-24 at 19:58 +0100, Dimitry Andric via Release-testers wrote: > On 24 Jan 2019, at 01:49, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > 8.0.0-rc1 was just tagged (from the branch at r351980). > > > > It took a little longer than planned, but it's looking good. > > > > Please run the test

Alex, ping? There was a thread about moving Risc-V out of experimental but I think it didn't go anywhere? Separately, do the listed patches sound okay for merging? Thanks, Hans On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:40 PM Bruce Hoult <brucehoult at sifive.com> wrote: > > In https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/branches/release_80 I find > that RISCV is still in

Hi, I've just tagged the 4.0.1 -rc1 release. Testers can start testing and uploading the binaries. If you still have bug fixes you want to get into the 4.0.1 release, you have until May 22 to submit merge requests. -Tom

Dear testers, 7.0.0-rc1 was just tagged (from the branch at r338847). It's early in the release process, but I'd like to find out what the status is of the branch on our various platforms. Please run the test script, share the results, and upload binaries. Thanks, Hans

Hello everyone, Release Candidate 2 was tagged earlier today as llvmorg-10.0.0-rc2. It includes 98 commits since the previous release candidate. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/10.0.0/#rc2 and https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/releases/tag/llvmorg-10.0.0-rc2 Pre-built binaries will be added as they become available. Please file bug reports for any issues

Hello testers, 4.0.0-rc3 was just tagged from the branch at r296762. This is a release candidate in the real sense: if no major issues show up with this one, it is the version that will be released. Please let me know if you find any issues, including in release notes or documentation, which will be on the pre-release web site later today. Please build, test, and upload binaries to the sftp

Dear testers, 3.7.0-rc4 has just been tagged. It is identical to rc3, plus: - r245902: Revert r245355: change of clang-tools-extra symlink in the release script - r245947: Merge of r245927: Fix LLDB build on MIPS - r245948: Deprecate the DataLayout on the TargetMachine, and backport the 3.8 API - Changes to the ReleaseNotes. Those changes should all be safe, and I expect this to be an extremely

Dear testers, Start your engines; 6.0.0-rc1 was just tagged. I know there are still open blockers and it's early in the process in a way, but I'd like to find out where we are. Please run the test script, let me know the results, and upload binaries. Thanks, Hans

Thanks! I'll get this posted on the web site. The "Performing Test ... failed to compile" failures from cmake are not interesting. But could you look in the log file and try to see what were the tests that failed in the "check-all" step? On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 4:39 PM Neil Nelson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Xubuntu/Ubuntu 19.04,

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 may be that the 'not' operator is not being found under bash at : 'RUN: at line 12';   not Perhaps this is would be better as the more commonly seen '!'. Neil Nelson On 9/13/19 12:12 PM, Neil Nelson via llvm-dev wrote: > > Toward the end of testing.9.0.0-rc4.log. > > Testing: 0 .. 10.. 20. > FAIL: Clang Tools :: clang-tidy/run-clang-tidy.cpp (17057 of

On Sat, 3 Jun 2017 16:04:57 -0700 Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > I think you should be able to fix it by changing the > compiler-rt/lib/xray/test/CMakeLists.txt. If you find the > "add_compiler_rt_test" call and move "-lstdc++" to the end, just after > "-lrt" it should work. Thanks, Tim. I don't see "-lrt":

Hi llvm-dev, I'm trying to reproduce an msan failure in one of the bots, but I can't seem to get the right incantation of building LLVM with msan. Here's what I've been doing: 1) Build the toolchain in one build directory, including `compiler-rt`. 2) Build the toolchain again with the just built toolchain in step 1, but this time with `-DLLVM_USE_SANITIZER=MemoryWithOrigins`. I

Aside: would it be useful to execute a build of the libc++/libc++abi with msan normally during release, and change the driver to look for these msan-built C++ libs when "-fsanitize=memory"? That would drastically cut down on the complexity of using msan. On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 5:43 AM Dean Michael Berris via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Thanks Vitaly and

Another option is just to run corresponding script from *https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/zorg/buildbot/builders/sanitizers/ <https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/zorg/trunk/zorg/buildbot/builders/sanitizers/>* in empty directory. On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 5:00 AM Peter Smith via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hello Dean, > > I've not done this

Hi All, WebAssembly has been around for a while now, it's still being actively worked on and used. I think it's long past time we make it a normal target so that it gets tested on a regular basis. (Most recent random breakage is https://reviews.llvm.org/rL342576 which fails make check with web assembly enabled). Any objections? I'll probably do this next week unless someone raises a

Hello everyone, 3.7-rc3 has just been tagged. Testers, please test, build binaries, upload to the sftp and report results to this thread. Again, a lot of patches got merged between rc2 and rc3, but hopefully nothing that should upset things. One thing that did change is that the release script now correctly symlinks clang-tools-extra into the build. If this causes problems on your platform,

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 01:14, Chris Lattner <clattner at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2020, at 10:01 AM, Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I believe code should be committed to LLVM when it is of sufficient > > quality, when it can be shown to benefit the LLVM user or developer > > communities, and when there is someone

Hi all, I am proposing the integration of a backend targeting the RISC-V ISA. RISC-V is a free and open instruction set architecture that was originally developed at UC Berkeley. Future development of the ISA specification will be handled by the 501(c)(6) non-profit RISC-V Foundation and its members <https://riscv.org/membership/?action=viewlistings>. You can find much more information at

ninja all check-xray [0/981] Building libLLVMTableGen for native TableGen... ninja: no work to do. [673/979] Linking CXX shared library lib/liblldCommon.so.6.0.0svn FAILED: lib/liblldCommon.so.6.0.0svn : && /usr/bin/clang++-3.9 -fPIC -Wpedantic -fPIC -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -Werror=date-time -std=c++11 -Wall -W -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual