similar to: [LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [llvm] r172534 - /llvm/trunk/test/Transforms/LoopStrengthReduce/post-inc-icmpzero.ll

On Jan 21, 2013, at 12:37 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote: > Moving to llvmdev... > > On Jan 21, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > > > Hi Manish, > > > > Thank you for looking at this. Recently opt started using the

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote: > Moving to llvmdev... > > On Jan 21, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > > > Hi Manish, > > > > Thank you for looking at this. Recently opt started using the "-mtriple" > command line flag to initialize the TargetMachine for IR-level >

Moving to llvmdev... On Jan 21, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Manish, > > Thank you for looking at this. Recently opt started using the "-mtriple" command line flag to initialize the TargetMachine for IR-level transformations that use it. Currently only the following passes are using this feature: LSR, LowerSwitch, BBVectorizer and

Moving to llvm-dev... On Jan 21, 2013, at 9:07 AM, Manish Verma <manish.verma at arm.com> wrote: > Hi Andy, > > I have been able track down the reason for the difference in output > generated by > opt. The difference is caused when the target triple specified in the > test-case > is not a supported target for opt/clang/llvm. In this case, opt doesn't thow > an

Hi Renato, Thanks! I will make sure the patches are posted to the correct mailing list. Manish On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Renato Golin Linaro < renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Manish, > > Thanks for the patch, I'll check and commit. > > cheers, > --renato > > PS: Patches are normally sent to llvm-commit list, unless they require a > lot of

Hi Manish, Thanks for the patch, I'll check and commit. cheers, --renato PS: Patches are normally sent to llvm-commit list, unless they require a lot of discussion. On 15 January 2013 14:52, Manish Verma <manish.avtaar at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Transform/LoopStrengthReduction/post-inc-icmpzero.ll was failing for > clang-native-arm-cortex-a9 build-bot configuration.

Hi, Transform/LoopStrengthReduction/post-inc-icmpzero.ll was failing for clang-native-arm-cortex-a9 build-bot configuration. The reason for the failure was the test was using hardcoded names. The attached patch fixes this failure by replacing the hard-coded variables names with pattern-matched variable names. I have checked that the test pass after applying the patch. Could somebody please

The obvious difference is that you're using --enable-optimized and implicitly --disable-assertions. If you run the tests with make check-all VERBOSE=1 'LIT_ARGS=-v ' > logfile and grep for FAILED in logfile, does what's listed there give any more details? (Quite possible in a Release-Asserts build it might not.) Cheers, Dave -----Original Message----- From: cfe-dev-bounces

Hello, I'm working on a binary translator project that emits an .ll file. I'm trying to debug it in Visual Studio and would like to be able to step through and see my generated .ll file in the debugger. Does LLVM support debug information corresponding to an input .ll file? My hunch is "no, as it expects debug info to come from Clang." I assemble it using: llc -filetype=obj

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 1:35 AM, Nicholas Wilson < iamthewilsonator at hotmail.com> wrote: > Luís, try using the -no-integrated-as flag to execute the assembler for > you. > We should probably make that the default for MSP430. > Cool. When I did that on macOS, LDC generated a lot of complaints, possibly because it is assuming mach-o files. I tried changing from -mtriple=msp430

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 here the failures. Anyway there is a suggested "revision" to use on PowerPC 32bit on Linux ? [...] llvm[0]: ***** Completed Release Build + make check llvm[0]: Running test suite make[1]: Entering directory `/home/llvm/work/src/llvm-2.8/test' Making a new site.exp file... Making LLVM 'lit.site.cfg' file... Making LLVM unittest

Hello everyone, I'm wrestling with the LLVM unit and regression tests now and would like to discuss some changes to make. I will be preparing patches, but any input/ideas are welcome. I leave "where the tests should run" question out for the scope yet. Let's review what kind of tests we have and how to handle them correctly. We have 3 types of unit and regression tests: 1.)

ARM subtarget features are determined by parsing the target tuple string TT. (ParseARMTriple(StringRef TT) in ARMMCTargetDesc.cpp) In llc, the -march setting overrides the architecture specified in -mtriple. So when you invoke: $ llc -march arm -mtriple armv7-none-linux ... ParseARMTriple() will see TT == "arm-none-linux" instead of "armv7-none-linux". As a result, the

Hi, I'm a bit confused with regard to the use of x86 and i386 in clang and llvm tools. I'm using clang to emit llvm with –m32 on a x86-64 machine. This generates a file with a target triple that uses i386. >From the i386 llvm file I generate a .bc file with llvm-as. When I try to generate an object file with llc -mtriple x86 -filetype=obj I get the following error: llc: target does

Hi LLVMDev list I am building LLVM from the SVN trunk at 213638 on a W7/X86_64/Cygwin system and running make check leads to a series of failed assertions like ******************** FAIL: LLVM :: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/test-setcond-fp.ll (6185 of 11245) ******************** TEST 'LLVM :: ExecutionEngine/MCJIT/test-setcond-fp.ll' FAILED ******************** Script: --

On Mar 2, 2012, at 12:04 AM, David Meyer <pdox at google.com> wrote: > ARM subtarget features are determined by parsing the target tuple string TT. (ParseARMTriple(StringRef TT) in ARMMCTargetDesc.cpp) > > In llc, the -march setting overrides the architecture specified in -mtriple. So when you invoke: > > $ llc -march arm -mtriple armv7-none-linux ... > >

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:31 PM, David Tweed <David.Tweed at arm.com> wrote: > The obvious difference is that you're using --enable-optimized and implicitly --disable-assertions. If you run the tests with > > make check-all VERBOSE=1 'LIT_ARGS=-v ' > logfile > > and grep for FAILED in logfile, does what's listed there give any more details? (Quite possible in

Hi Lang Le 24/07/2014 18:17, Lang Hames a écrit : > Hi Francis, > > It is possible to XFAIL a regression test (grep for XFAIL in the > llvm/test directory for examples), however that's discouraged. The > fact that this test is failing indicates that part of the JIT > infrastructure is broken on W7/X86_64/Cygwin. > > How long have you been building LLVM in this

Hi, Is it normal/expected for `llc` to support a different set of targets than `lli`? I have a hello.ll on which this works: $ llc -mtriple=armv7a-linux-gnueabihf hello.ll # OK, generates hello.s But this doesn't: $ lli -mtriple=armv7a-linux-gnueabihf hello.ll # lli: error creating EE: No available targets are compatible with this triple, see -version for the available targets. I'm

Hi Bastien, Weird gcc is generating fma for my platform STEricsson Novathor with Linaro, code works. It also works when I use LLVM to generate fma (using llc -mtriple=armv7-eabi). Maybe someone from ARM can answer the question ? Seb From: JF Bastien [mailto:jfb at google.com] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 5:36 PM To: Sebastien DELDON-GNB Cc: Anitha Boyapati; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: