similar to: in axis() suppressing axis line but keeping tick marks

Justin, I haven't seen this before. I suspect it is because of line-tables-only. Can you try it with full debug info? On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:36 PM Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > +aizatsky > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:34 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> > wrote: > > I'm working on a fuzzer using libFuzzer and I wanted to take

I'll need more details then. Maybe you can share the binary & its .sancov file? Or if you have a way to reproduce it? On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:23 PM Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Mike Aizatsky <aizatsky at google.com> > wrote: > > Justin, > > I haven't seen this before. I suspect it is because of

HI everyone, I'm plotting a histogram in R and within that histogram i need to demonstrate the percentage of another variable (Percentage of MutStatus) within the bins plotted inthe histogram....I don't know how to do that! Data:Validation_Status Mutation_Status TvarRatio Wildtype None 0.08 Wildtype None 0.08 Wildtype None 0.08 Wildtype None 0.08 Wildtype None 0.080139373 Wildtype None

Hi, I have the follow ggplot2 code I am running: ggplot(data=bb.res.math,aes(x=factor(id.bb),y=bb.math.comb,fill=BB)) + geom_bar() + facet_grid(BB~.) + scale_fill_brewer(pal="Set1") + ylab("Average Student Residual (Math)") + xlab("Student ID") The number of unique id.bb is 2207 and so my X-axis has a couple of thousands, indistinguishable tick marks that correspond

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>wrote: > > On Oct 30, 2013 7:25 PM, "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com> > wrote: > > > > On 10/30/13 7:09 PM, Philip Reames wrote: > >> > >> David, Quentin - Thanks for the feedback. Responses inline. > >> > >> On 10/30/13 11:21 AM,

Continuing my quixotic effort to get 'check-all' clean, I am seeing a Fuzzer failure on x86-64 Linux. Do any builders run fuzzer tests? FAIL: libFuzzer :: value-profile-mem.test (103 of 103) ******************** TEST 'libFuzzer :: value-profile-mem.test' FAILED ******************** Script: -- : 'RUN: at line 4'; /build/x86_64/./bin/clang --driver-mode=g++ -std=c++11

FWIW I think that one was always flaky. > On Jan 4, 2019, at 2:53 PM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > +Matt Morehouse <mailto:mascasa at google.com> > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 11:43 AM David Greene via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > Continuing my quixotic effort

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Diego Novillo" <dnovillo at google.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Chris Lattner" <clattner at apple.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Friday, March 7, 2014 8:07:19 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] RFC - Adding an optimization

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com> wrote: > The fundamental questions we need to answer are the following: > FWIW, there was a longer discussion on the lists when the actual option was added. I'll try to relay my memory of that discussion, but you might need to track it down or involve some of the other people who participated in it.

I'm working on a fuzzer using libFuzzer and I wanted to take a look at how my coverage was doing, as per the instructions here: http://llvm.org/docs/LibFuzzer.html#how-good-is-my-fuzzer First of all, I suspect the instructions there are out of date, but passing -dump_coverage=1 to the binary rather than setting ASAN_OPTIONS generated a .sancov file for me. However, when I inspect this

> > > > We may need some additional info. What kind of additional info? > I haven't put a ton of thought into > this, but I'm hoping we can either (a) use debug info as is or add some > extra (valid) debug info to support this, or (b) add an extra > debug-info-like section to instrumented binaries with the information we > need. > I'd try this data

> On Jul 23, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Sedat Dilek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Piotr Padlewski <prazek at google.com <mailto:prazek at google.com>> wrote: >> How big is your project? >> LTO eats RAM even faster than chrome. For example linking clang with LTO >>

Hello, Is it possible to somehow similar to how DWARF functions with assembly find out which line numbers in unoptimized code are associated with which bitcode instructions for the purpose of debugging compiler passes? I am curious about whether this is possible prior to writing some instrumentation passes for the purpose of debugging them. Thanks in advance, Carter. -------------- next part

On Oct 30, 2013 7:25 PM, "Philip Reames" <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > > On 10/30/13 7:09 PM, Philip Reames wrote: >> >> David, Quentin - Thanks for the feedback. Responses inline. >> >> On 10/30/13 11:21 AM, David Blaikie wrote: >>> >>> Actually CCing Eric. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at

lit.py: ~/workspace/LLVM/llvm/tools/clang/test/lit.cfg:200: note: using clang: '~/workspace/LLVM/ninjacmake/./bin/clang' -- Testing: 37268 tests, 8 threads -- Testing: 0 .. FAIL: Builtins-i386-linux :: divsc3_test.c (4326 of 37268) ******************** TEST 'Builtins-i386-linux :: divsc3_test.c' FAILED ******************** Script: -- ~/workspace/LLVM/ninjacmake/./bin/clang

I'm not sure if this was intended, but it's going to be a problem for sample profiles. When we compile with -gmlt, the profiler expects to find the line number for all the function headers so that it can compute relative line locations for the profile. The tool that reads the ELF binary is not finding them, so it writes out absolute line numbers, which are impossible to match during the

I'm unsure why this is failing this week, but when I build for FreeBSD HEAD, I now get a failure to find <stdarg.h>. Very strange. Maybe its missing a -I /usr/include somewhere? [1950/2811] Building CXX object projects/compiler-rt/lib/tsan/CMakeFiles/clang_rt.tsan-x86_64.dir/rtl/tsan_interceptors.cc.o FAILED: /usr/bin/CC -D__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS -D__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS

On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 6:21:14 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri Oct 24 2014 at 6:11:21 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at

On 10/30/13 7:09 PM, Philip Reames wrote: > David, Quentin - Thanks for the feedback. Responses inline. > > On 10/30/13 11:21 AM, David Blaikie wrote: >> Actually CCing Eric. >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Quentin Colombet >> <qcolombet at apple.com <mailto:qcolombet at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Philip, >>

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Xinliang David Li <xinliangli at gmail.com> wrote: > Diego, > > I think sampleFDO needs to be designed in a way which can protect itself > from future breakage like this. The roots in the unnecessary dependency of > sample FDO on gmlt setting. It is totally reasonable to tune debug binary > size by changes like this. > > The right way