similar to: Multiple documents in one test file

On 14/07/2020 03:27, David Blaikie via llvm-dev wrote: > (+Richard - it's handy to include folks from previous discussions > explicitly so everyone can more easily keep track of the conversation) > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 6:17 PM Fangrui Song via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > Sometimes it is

We have a similar option (-split-input-file) in `mlir-opt`: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/master/mlir/test/Dialect/Affine/invalid.mlir With a single `RUN:` lit invocation the tool itself will loop over all the split sections in the file. This is convenient to test error cases where the tool would abort at the first error otherwise. I don't think we can easily achieve this with a

?The idea itself is indeed good. Regarding to escaping: I think we should have it. Imagine the following example (I've took it from D73828). --- !ELF FileHeader: Class: ELFCLASS[[BITS]] Data: ELFDATA2LSB Type: ET_EXEC Machine: EM_386 # RUN: yaml2obj %s --docnum=4 -D BITS=32 -o %t-32bit.o # RUN: yaml2obj %s --docnum=4 -D BITS=64 -o %t-64bit.o Without escaping it would

I am adding -D k=v to yaml2obj, similar to clang -D. This makes it easy to generate {32-bit,64-bit} x {big-endian,little-endian} tests. --- !ELF FileHeader: Class: ELFCLASS[[BITS]] Data: ELFDATA2[[ENCODE]] Type: ET_DYN Machine: EM_X86_64 # RUN: yaml2obj -D BITS=32 -D ENCODE=LSB %s -o %t.32le # RUN: yaml2obj -D BITS=32 -D ENCODE=MSB %s -o %t.32le # RUN: yaml2obj

Hi all, The following tests fail because my username (csabaraduly) contains "bar" : ******************** FAIL: LLVM :: tools/llvm-objcopy/ELF/regex.test (47099 of 50832) ******************** TEST 'LLVM :: tools/llvm-objcopy/ELF/regex.test' FAILED ******************** Script: -- : 'RUN: at line 1'; /home/csabaraduly/wk/LLVM-git/__build_release_99/bin/yaml2obj

For ignore-undefined-symbols.s, the simplest fix ought to be to have the llvm-mc RUN line take the source from <stdin>: # RUN: llvm-mc –filetype=obj –triple=x86_64-pc-linux %s –o %t.o –g becomes # RUN: llvm-mc –filetype=obj –triple=x86_64-pc-linux < %s –o %t.o –g But in this case, llvm-symbolizer still prints the file as $CWD/<stdin> which seems like its own separate bug. --paulr

> On Mar 31, 2020, at 10:55 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 to all that & cc'ing a few of the usual suspects as FYI > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 10:36 AM Pavel Labath via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > > For me personally, the ability to write/edit syntactically

On 2020-04-30, Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev wrote: >For the tools (which I know is mostly what James works on) I’d say new command-line options are worth release-noting as a way to advertise their existence. > >From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of David Blaikie via llvm-dev >Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 11:47 AM >To: James Henderson <jh7370.2008

I just got a Diffusion notification about a change of mine being reverted by Fangrui, but I'm not sure that's actually what happened and am confused and concerned. My commit was "[DebugInfo] Allow spill slots in call site parameter descriptions", and it appears in the history under two hashes: 1ee84e and 67c416. The first commit contains the actual change. The second touches

Try using $PWD/test.cpp on the clang command line. I am seeing the duplicate DIFile entries, but not yet able to reproduce a .debug_line section with multiple directory entries. --paulr From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Tomar, Sourabh Singh via llvm-dev Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 1:07 PM To: Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com>; cfe-dev at

Hi, Thanks for your patch, Huang. It looks good to me. Just one comment: can you write a testcase, similar to the others used for linker script testing, with your example? Alternatively, you can modify lld/test/elf/linkerscript/sections-with-wildcards.test to test your case. This will make your patch complete and ready for commit, and will ensure we do not regress on this bug if this code is ever

2015-04-28 10:14 GMT-07:00 Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com>: > Hi Alex, > > Thanks for working on this. > > Personally I would rather not have to write YAML inputs but instead resort > on the what the machine dumps look like. That being said, I can live with > YAML :). > > More importantly, how do you plan to report syntax errors to the users? > Things

>Пятница, 17 июля 2020, 19:42 +03:00 от David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>: > >On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:03 AM Fangrui Song < maskray at google.com > wrote: >> >> Thanks for the write-up! >> >> On 2020-07-16, David Blaikie wrote: >> >In short: Perhaps we should switch lld to the bfd-style tombstoning >> >behavior for a release or

Eh - I'd say "Big" new features (hey, LLVM supports DWARFv5, or Split DWARF, or DWARF type units, or DWARF compression (though I don't think I wrote any release notes for several of those features that I implemented)). I wouldn't bother release noting changes in output format for tools we don't consider to have stable output, or changes in robustness/better error

I'd like to (re)start a discussion on a few gotchas in FileCheck that I've noticed working on various tests in llvm's suites. This begain in a review [1], but I'll try to summarize here so it gets the right audience before decisions are made on it (so to speak). 1: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77227 The main sticking point is the abundance of checks in FileCheck tests that appear to

In short: Perhaps we should switch lld to the bfd-style tombstoning behavior for a release or two, letting users opt-in to testing with the new -1/-2 tombstoning in the interim, before switching to the new tombstone by default (while still having the flag to switch back when users find surprise places that can't handle the new behavior). In long: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81784 and follow-on

Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek < kparzysz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 3/26/2014 8:04 AM, İsmail Dönmez wrote: > >> >> Recent trunk has a lot of failures on PPC64/Linux. One seems to be crash >> with a backtrace like: >> > > Is this with "make check"? I can try it on my G5/FreeBSD box when I get > home make

Hi all: I'm writing testcase for the MC layer regression in llvm, the disassembled string is a bit complicate, for example: "IALU.T0 (I0) = BIU0.DM ; REPEAT AT ( 2 ) ;;" The spaces in the disassembled string is error-prone. Is there any option to tell the FileCheck utility to ignore the spaces ? Kind Regards. Shawn.

Hi, building 'check-all' on any of my machines running OS X 10.10 usually fails because a few tests fail due to some processes being killed by the kernel (there's always "Killed: 9" somewhere in lit's error output). Everything's fine on 10.9. How do folks deal with this? Don't use 10.10 for building llvm? Is there some tweakable to tell the kernel "please

Hello, When running test-release.sh using GCC 5.4.0 we encountered this error : /home/anil/llvm1000_rc1_binary_upload/rc1/llvm-project/clang-tools-extra/clangd/Hover.cpp: In function ‘llvm::StringLiteral clang::clangd::{anonymous}::getNameForExpr(const clang::Expr*)’: /home/anil/llvm1000_rc1_binary_upload/rc1/llvm-project/clang-tools-extra/clangd/Hover.cpp:450:10: error: could not convert