similar to: [LLVMdev] Getting command line options to affect subtarget features

On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 09:42 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bill Schmidt" <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:26:15 AM > > Subject: [LLVMdev] Getting command line options to affect subtarget features > > > > The problem I'm trying to

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Schmidt" <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:26:15 AM > Subject: [LLVMdev] Getting command line options to affect subtarget features > > The problem I'm trying to solve: Invoking clang on PowerPC with > -fno-altivec has no effect. > > From what

On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 11:23 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 10:17 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 09:42 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Bill Schmidt" <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > > > > Sent:

On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 10:17 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 09:42 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Bill Schmidt" <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > > > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:26:15 AM > > > Subject: [LLVMdev] Getting command line

On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 11:29 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 11:23 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 10:17 -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 09:42 -0600, Hal Finkel wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Bill Schmidt" <wschmidt at

To fix some problems with how condition registers are saved/restored for PowerPC, I need to override TargetRegisterInfo::hasReservedSpillSlot() in PPCRegisterInfo. I've had some difficulties because of the constness of the function, and I'm wondering what the best way to handle this would be. Essentially I need to add a field to PPCRegisterInfo, and modify that field in

Hi all, I'm investigating the following test case that reports as an unexpected pass on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu. Clang : CodeGenCXX/member-alignment.cpp This test case is marked as XFAIL for arm and powerpc. However, the test passes fine for powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu. There are two tests of this form: void t::bar(void) { // CHECK: _ZN1t3barEv{{.*}} align 2

To test some recent changes, I need to verify that seven instructions are generated. However, the order of those instructions doesn't matter (they are all independent loads from memory). Is there a way to tell FileCheck to reset its scan position rather than assuming all CHECK: instructions must be in the given order? My initial version of the test was to use -O0, attempting to ensure that

Hello, I have tried a lot fix this error but am not able to can you please find me a solution am trying to compile the SAFECode in Cygwin Environment to work for windows. used make -j4 command to make the files in cygwin i have got this error make[5]: Leaving directory '/home/uidr7475/Work/LLVM_OBJ/projects/safecode/tools/clang/include' /usr/bin/cp: cannot stat

It seems the crash of llvm/clang build on aarch64 Debian has been fixed by r220941. Thanks, -Jiangning 2014-11-05 8:45 GMT+08:00 Jiangning Liu <liujiangning1 at gmail.com>: > The versions I'm using right now are > > * gcc: (Debian/Linaro 4.9.1-14) 4.9.1 > * libstdc++: libstdc++.so.6.0.20 > > Thanks, > -Jiangning > > 2014-11-05 4:46 GMT+08:00 Chris Bieneman

Adding Jiangning Liu to the thread. Jiangning reported a similar issue on the llvm-commits list on Debian aarch64. In general it sounds like std::call_once may not really be bug free. Jiangning, can you please provide your gcc/libstdc++ version? Thanks, -Chris > On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:38 AM, Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 12:17

Ok, I'll put a patch together to fix this later today. I'll probably do what Reid was suggesting and use what is already in there for Windows. Thanks, Samuel Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote on 11/04/2014 12:11:08 PM: > From: Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > To: Samuel F Antao/Watson/IBM at IBMUS > Cc: azanella at

Hi Bill, You can find the same issue in the buildbot: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64-elf-linux2/builds/16444/steps/compile.llvm.stage2/logs/stdio It is failing for me both in BE (gcc 4.8.2) and LE(4.9.1). I am compiling with clang 3.5, but those are the gcc toolchains I am using. What do you think is the best way to fix this? Thanks! Samuel Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at

Dear LLVMers, I am trying to measure the performance overhead (if any) of the canaries that clang inserts in the code. I would like to do this automatically, using the LLVM test infra-structure. However, I am not sure if that is possible. Could someone tell me which flags in the TEST.nightly.Makefile script, (or any other script) I must change to have this done? Usually I insert canaries with

On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 4:17 AM, 陳韋任 <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw> wrote: > Hi, Justin > > Thansk, but I have a little concern though. I saw Chiou mentioned the > compatibility issue of PTX on the mailing list. > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-March/038654.html > > In my PTX.td patch, > > def FeaturePTX23 : SubtargetFeature<"ptx23",

Hi, Justin Thansk, but I have a little concern though. I saw Chiou mentioned the compatibility issue of PTX on the mailing list. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-March/038654.html In my PTX.td patch, def FeaturePTX23 : SubtargetFeature<"ptx23", "PTXVersion", PTX_VERSION_2_3", "Use PTX Language Version

On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 12:29 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk>wrote: > > > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 11:50 +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Steven Newbury <steve at snewbury.org.uk > > >wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at

This isn't purely a fast-math issue...ConstantFolding isn't using enable-unsafe-fp-math to decide whether to emit the '0'. It's just looking for the llvm intrinsic rather than a call to sqrt: %0 = call double @llvm.sqrt.f64(double -2.000000e+00) vs: %0 = call double @sqrt(double -2.000000e+00) #2 So how about a front-end fix: If the parameter is a negative constant,

Hi, I'm working on bringing up complete coverage for a Gentoo x32 "desktop" system. I've been cooking up quite a few patches for various packages to push upstream, but right now, the biggest blocker is the lack of support for building with/codegen targeting x32 in llvm/clang. Since the x32 patches were sent last year, I see support code has landed in LLVM, and basic handling of

On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 12:09 -0400, Stephen Canon wrote: > > On Sep 26, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I know it's part of test-suite/external, but this constant fold code has > >> been around 5+ years. Was the bug lying dormant all this time, only visible > >> on PPC, or something else? > > >