similar to: Non-determinism in libFuzzer tests on AArch64

Hi all, I tried to use std::to_string somewhere and one of the bots yelled at me [1] because it couldn't find it. Searching through the mailing lists reveals a long stream of fixup patches trying to avoid std::to_string, but there are uses of it in tree in the AVR and Hexagon backends, libFuzzer and the Gold plugin. I can only imagine they got away with it because the particular bots that

Great! I expect I'll be able to cut it down further once I start fusing these smaller state-machines together. Before that, I'll re-order the patches that went into that diff so that I don't have to re-commit the regression before fixing it. > On 31 May 2017, at 13:48, Diana Picus <diana.picus at linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > This runs in: > real

Hi Diana and Vitaly, Could you give https://reviews.llvm.org/differential/diff/100829/ <https://reviews.llvm.org/differential/diff/100829/> a try? When measuring the compile of AArch64InstructionSelector.cpp.o with asan enabled and running under instruments's Allocation profiler, my machine reports that the cumulative memory allocations is down to ~3.5GB (was ~10GB), the number of

Hi Daniel, I did your experiment on a TK1 machine (same as the bots) and for r303258 I get: real 18m28.882s user 35m37.091s sys 0m44.726s and for r303259: real 50m52.048s user 88m25.473s sys 0m46.548s If I can help investigate, please let me know, otherwise we can just try your fixes and see how they affect compilation time. Thanks, Diana On 22 May 2017 at 10:49, Daniel

Is https://reviews.llvm.org/differential/diff/100829/ replacement for r303341? If so LGTM. r303542 msan AArch64InstructionSelector.cpp: 1m17.209s r303542+diff/100829/ <https://reviews.llvm.org/differential/diff/100829/> msan AArch64InstructionSelector.cpp: 1m24.724s On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 6:13 AM, Daniel Sanders <daniel_l_sanders at apple.com> wrote: > Great! I expect

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:51 AM Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Could you give https://reviews.llvm.org/differential/diff/99949/ a try? > It brings back the reverted commit and fixes two significant compile-time > issues. Assuming it works for you too, I'll finish off the patches and post > them individually. > > The first one

Thanks for trying that patch. I agree that 34 mins still isn't good enough but we're heading in the right direction. Changing the partitioning predicate to the instruction opcode rather than the number of operands in the top-level instruction will hopefully cut it down further. I also have a patch that shaves a small amount off of the compile-time by replacing the various

Nope, no sanitizers. On 22 May 2017 at 11:38, Daniel Sanders <daniel_l_sanders at apple.com> wrote: > Is that with -fsanitize=memory too? > > I'm currently building ToT with r303258 reverted. Once that's done I'll commit the revert and start investigating fixes. > >> On 22 May 2017, at 10:22, Diana Picus <diana.picus at linaro.org> wrote: >>

Hi, It seems the problem is that the bot is updating llvm.src, but trying to build from llvm. Galina, it looks like this is related to your recent changes to zorg, you probably missed a spot somewhere and I can't find it on a first glance. Could you have a look? Thanks, Diana On 5 September 2016 at 12:01, Diana Picus <diana.picus at linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Nico, > > Thanks

It must be r303341, I commented on corresponding llvm-commits thread. On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Diana Picus via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Ok, thanks. I'll try to do a bisect next week to see if I can find it. > > Cheers, > Diana > > On 19 May 2017 at 16:29, Daniel Sanders <daniel_l_sanders at apple.com> > wrote: > > >

I'm fairly sure the problem is that we still support building with gcc 4.8.x, and that version of gcc did not have std::to_string. It is not just an NDK issue. -Hal On 05/17/2017 06:05 AM, Pavel Labath via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi Diana, > > I am responsible for that bot, and probably a great number of those fixups. > > The root of the problem is that android NDK comes with a

> On 19 May 2017, at 14:54, Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > r303259 will have increased compile-time since it tripled the number of importable > SelectionDAG rules but a quick measurement building the affected file: > ninja lib/Target/<Target>/CMakeFiles/LLVM<Target>CodeGen.dir/<Target>InstructionSelector.cpp.o > for

Hi, There was a new Python setuptools release (36.0.0) today, that caused this compatibility issue. The suggestion to stop breaking the builds is to add a static setuptools version on lnt's requirements.client.txt. The latest known compatible version is 35.0.2. I have tested it building a LNT sandbox and it seems to works. setuptools==35.0.2 I'll create a bug on LNT so we can

Hi, We've noticed that recently some of our bots (mostly clang-cmake-armv7-a15 and clang-cmake-thumbv7-a15) started timing out whenever someone commits a change to TableGen: r303418: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15/builds/7268 r303346: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15/builds/7242 r303341:

Hi all, It seems some of the test-suite bots are red because they can't find the six module anymore. See e.g. http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-aarch64-quick/builds/6867 http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-lnt/builds/5727 Does anyone know how to fix this? Thanks, Diana -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, many of the bots on http://lab.llvm.org:8011/console don't do anything in their compile phase, even if they should. For example, these bots all don't do anything in their compile phase in any builds, even if they should: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x64-ninja-win7/ http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux

Hi all, I added a buildbot [1] running the test-suite with -O0 -global-isel. It runs into the same 2 timeouts that I reported previously on this thread (paq8p and scimark2). It would be nice to make it green before flipping the switch. At the moment, it lives in an internal buildmaster that I've setup for this purpose. If we fix it and it proves to be stable for a week or two, I'll move

Hi, The sanitizer-windows bot seems to be failing every now and then on the AddressSanitizer-i386-windows :: TestCases/Windows/dll_host.cc test [1]. For instance, see builds 25884, 25876, 25867, 25858 etc. Could someone have a look? Regards, Diana [1] http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-windows/builds/25884/steps/run%20tests/logs/stdio

On 18 May 2017 at 19:09, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Diana, > >> On May 18, 2017, at 1:15 AM, Diana Picus <diana.picus at linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 18 May 2017 at 09:06, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> wrote: >>> I think Diana found that when enabling r299283, the bootstrap failed with >>> llvm-tblgen

On 18 May 2017 at 09:06, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> wrote: > I think Diana found that when enabling r299283, the bootstrap failed with > llvm-tblgen segfaulting. > So there clearly is some work required there. Indeed. @Quentin, what is the status of that patch? Have you been working on it since then? Should I investigate the segfault more and send you a reproducer?