similar to: Attention bot owners

git 2.7.4 was released 17-Mar-2016. https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/ Here is the git downloads page. https://git-scm.com/downloads Neil Nelson On 10/14/19 1:56 AM, Diana Picus via llvm-dev wrote: > Hi Galina, > > Thanks for the heads up. > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 at 21:09, Galina Kistanova via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>

I think what she is referring to was that the build seemed to be triggered by a commit to a project that shouldn't trigger builds on a libcxx bot (i.e. the change was in llvm). I have a somewhat orthogonal but related question. In the past, commits to compiler-rt did not trigger builds on llvm/clang/sanitizer bots. Has this behaviour been rectified with the move to github? I am really sorry

Hi Galina, It seems that our libcxx bots are now triggering builds for any changes to llvm: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/libcxx-libcxxabi-libunwind-aarch64-linux/builds/2434 Should I file a bug report for this? Thanks, Diana On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 11:36, Galina Kistanova via cfe-commits <cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > The staging master is

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

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

Thanks, Galina. It doesn't explain why the test worked on some bots but not this one, but Justin's workaround is okay with me. --paulr From: Galina Kistanova [mailto:gkistanova at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 10:09 AM To: Robinson, Paul Cc: Davide Italiano; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Problem with 'sed' on one Windows bot? There is nothing

Hello build bot owners! The staging master is ready. Please feel free to use it to make sure your bots would work well with the monorepo and github. The following builders could be configured to build monorepo: * clang-atom-d525-fedora-rel * clang-native-arm-lnt-perf * clang-cmake-armv7-lnt * clang-cmake-armv7-selfhost-neon * clang-cmake-armv7-quick * clang-cmake-armv7-global-isel *

As Davide suggests, most likely it's a bot software installation snafu. But the simpler sed script works perfectly, and I'll do that for now. I had understood that LLVM expected people to install GnuWin32, but maybe it's not sufficiently well specified about versions and whatnot. --paulr > -----Original Message----- > From: davide.italiano at gmail.com [mailto:davide.italiano

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

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?

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:

Turns out it really is a GlobalISel issue - we eat up too much stack space because all the constants used in the switches are stored on the stack. We need to fix this somehow before changing the default. I'll try to give it a run with Quentin's r299283 on top to see if it helps. Cheers, Diana On 15 May 2017 at 09:38, Diana Picus <diana.picus at linaro.org> wrote: > Got another

Hi Quentin, I actually did a run with -mllvm -optimize-regalloc -mllvm -regalloc=greedy over the weekend and the test does pass with that. Haven't measured the compile time though. Cheers, Diana On 19 May 2017 at 19:06, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Diana, > > On May 19, 2017, at 1:33 AM, Diana Picus <diana.picus at linaro.org> wrote: > >

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

Agreed. That was probably just luck before :) -eric On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 5:22 AM Diana Picus via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > It turns out that can be fixed by adding -lm to the link line, so I > will probably convert it into a test-suite bug. > > I don't suppose it's crucial to handle the fabs intrinsic nicely at -O0. > > On 12 May 2017 at

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

Hi all, We had some internal discussions about flipping the default for O0 and we concluded that we wanted to postpone it. *** Why Is That? *** We don’t want to send the wrong message that GlobalISel’s design is set in stone and ready for broader adoption. In particular, 1. The APIs are still evolving and can still possibly change significantly 2. The TableGen backend to reuse the existing SD