similar to: RFC: Adding GCC C Torture Suite to External Test Suites

On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 at 17:34, Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > On 8/30/19 10:18 AM, Sam Elliott via llvm-dev wrote: > > TL;DR: I am proposing to add the GCC C Torture suite [1], as an additional external source of tests for the “nightly” test suite. If you are willing to review the patch, it is here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66887 >

There are 1500 tests total, and about 100 on the platform-agnostic blacklist. Alex and I do not think this is an onerous burden for maintenance, either as an external test suite or if the test suite is imported. In the long term, if we import the tests, we know we will have to do updates when the Embecosm work lands, and beyond that updates can be more sporadic. It’s not clear to me how much

Op di 3 sep. 2019 om 18:36 schreef Finkel, Hal J. via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: > On 9/3/19 7:19 AM, Sam Elliott wrote: > > There are 1500 tests total, and about 100 on the platform-agnostic > blacklist. Alex and I do not think this is an onerous burden for > maintenance, either as an external test suite or if the test suite is > imported. > > > >

As you will have seen from previous postings, I've been working on upstream LLVM support for the RISC-V instruction set architecture. The initial RFC <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-August/103748.html> provides a good overview of my approach. Thanks to funding from a third party, I've recently been able to return to this effort as my main focus. Now feels like a good

Hello, James, Thank you very much for your advices! The next step in compiler development on Espressif is object file generation. There are no essential problems with this step, it will be implemented in nearest future. Currently Xtensa backend is able to print and parse assembly, I used about 1300 tests from gcc torture testsuite and GNU binutils to debug assembly output and now all tests

I get the following errors when building the torture suite under HP-UX 11i with HP AnsiC. They are actually somewhat similar to the errors that I get trying to build the whole package with gcc: Compiling torture/torture.c In file included from include/includes.h:109, from torture/torture.c:23: /usr/include/sys/socket.h:484: error: parse error before "sendfile"

I have run the torture test again svn head rev 76522 (2009/07/20) there are now 2 compilation and 23 runtime failure. A tarball with reproducers is attached. Most problems are still vargs related. Robert On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Sandeep Patel <deeppatel1987 at gmail.com>wrote: > I don't have a target in front of me to run these tests at the moment, > but walking

Can you file a bug? Thanks. Evan On Jul 22, 2009, at 8:30 AM, robert muth wrote: > I have run the torture test again svn head rev 76522 (2009/07/20) > there are now > 2 compilation and 23 runtime failure. A tarball with reproducers is > attached. > Most problems are still vargs related. > > Robert > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Sandeep Patel

I wrote a few scripts to run llvm/arm against the gnu c torture test suite which consists of over 900 smallish tests. There were quite a few failures with llvm/arm which I hereby want to report (see attached tarball for the actual failing testsc). Most of the failures are related to vararg/stdarg. I think I saw a bug files for this but cannot find it anymore. Is somebody on this? Finally, I

Just filed bugs for this and a new rather severe one involving address arithmetic. Robert On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > Can you file a bug? Thanks. > Evan > > On Jul 22, 2009, at 8:30 AM, robert muth wrote: > > I have run the torture test again svn head rev 76522 (2009/07/20) there are > now > 2 compilation and 23

I don't have a target in front of me to run these tests at the moment, but walking manually through va-arg-1.c, it's pretty clear that there's some disconnect between the register spilling that happens in LowerFORMAL_ARGUMENTS and what happens in LowerVASTART in ARMISelLowering.cpp. deep On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 8:45 AM, robert muth<robert at muth.org> wrote: > I wrote a few

Hi, Sam. I think that it's a fair comparison. Keep in mind that the GP is only used to reach global variables of local scope and the GOT, where the address of global variables of global scope reside. This model assumes that the distance between the GP and the global data area, GOT and local scope variables is defined at link time. __ Evandro Menezes ◊ SiFive ◊ Austin, TX > On Mar

Hello-- I submitted of extensions.conf that contains my "telemarketer torture" menus, last week sometime to the mailing list. I got back a note from the mailing list machinery, stating that it was too big, and would be subject to approval. No such approval came, I guess. Either I missed it, or it didn't rate, or the moderator just plain hasn't gotten around to it yet. So, I

On 23 November 2017 at 09:38, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > On 14 November 2017 at 16:03, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: >> Dear list, >> >> At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working >> session the day after, those of us working on RISC-V with LLVM decided >> it would be worthwhile to schedule regular

For background on these calls, see <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-September/135087.html>. Reminder: the purpose is to co-ordinate between active contributors. If you have support questions etc then it's best to post to llvm-dev. We have a call every alternate Thursday at 4pm BST, via <https://meet.google.com/ske-zcog-spp>. We have created a shared calendar which

There will be a RISC-V focused Birds of a Feather (BoF) session at the LLVM Dev Meeting in a few weeks time <https://2017llvmdevmtg.sched.com/event/CMiv/co-ordinating-risc-v-development-in-llvm> (Wednesday, October 18, 4:20pm - 5:05pm) The aim of this session is to bring together everyone with an interest in RISC-V support LLVM, and especially those from companies who have had private

Hi, I have some annoying telemarketer calling me on a recurring basis, but I'd like to discourage them a bit and have some fun. I found this: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+AEL+Telemarketer+Torture but the link to download the sound files is dead (wyoming.e-tools.com is NXDOMAIN). Anyone have a copy of these? -Adam

Oh, I wasn’t really thinking about devices without an MMU where the addresses are physically separated. Makes sense. This reminds me of rwpi on ARM; it has a sort of similar scheme of referring to data indirectly through a pointer, but it also changes the ABI to keep the pointer in a reserved register. -Eli From: Evandro Menezes <evandro.menezes at sifive.com> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2020

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Anyone have the telemarketer torture prompts? I would seriously like to revive this..... - -- James Finstrom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH3I8qdloC7YyaIOoRAlAjAJ9Hp+3SS2Z8179HecWIETp4RVDzWQCeMizp fW2JPZdYl/uxG1ziUwYnHGo= =QPbv -----END PGP

On 14 November 2017 at 16:03, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > Dear list, > > At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working > session the day after, those of us working on RISC-V with LLVM decided > it would be worthwhile to schedule regular sync-up calls in order to > better co-ordinate ongoing work between different developers. This is >