digitalmars.D.ldc - LLVM 3.3 release testing
- David Nadlinger (9/9) May 09 2013 LLVM 3.3 is scheduled to be released on June 5th, with RC 1
- David Nadlinger (4/4) May 09 2013 The std.digest failures turned out to be caused by
- David Nadlinger (6/9) May 09 2013 The druntime_src_rt_arraydouble_release_32 failure seems to be
- David Nadlinger (7/11) May 09 2013 I really don't like the llvm::Atributes API – their immutable
- Kai Nacke (3/15) May 10 2013 It is also an area with changes in each LLVM release.
- Kai Nacke (4/8) May 09 2013 I got a SIGSEV in llvm::SelectionDAG::getMemcpy() while compiling
- Kai Nacke (3/13) May 09 2013 Yes, it is. SIGSEV is gone with your latest commit.
- David Nadlinger (34/34) May 09 2013 Remaining failures:
- Kai Nacke (6/40) May 10 2013 Now I know that I stumbled across some of the failure (std.array,
- David Nadlinger (16/20) May 10 2013 Without a closer look, it might or might not be the same issue,
- Michael (1/1) May 10 2013 Would be nice to try a windows build.
- David Nadlinger (5/6) May 10 2013 Yep, I'm planning to provide a MinGW one as soon as the beta is
- Kai Nacke (11/12) May 11 2013 If you like you can try this: http://www.redstar.de/ldc/LDC.zip.
- Michael (2/11) May 11 2013 ms stack is not issue)
- Kai Nacke (3/9) May 11 2013 I try. I already reduced the test case.
- David Nadlinger (5/34) May 11 2013 In theory all of these should be gone. Running the test suite on
- David Nadlinger (5/8) May 11 2013 Okay, the build is green now.
LLVM 3.3 is scheduled to be released on June 5th, with RC 1 already being out. We should start making sure that there are no regressions affecting us ASAP. There seems to be at least one issue regarding EH: https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/328 (the std.array, std.container, and std.datetime tests fail in release mode, this is probably the culprit). David
May 09 2013
The std.digest failures turned out to be caused by TargetTransformInfo not being initialized – not sure whether actually requiring it to be present is an LLVM bug or not. David
May 09 2013
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 17:56:21 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:The std.digest failures turned out to be caused by TargetTransformInfo not being initialized – not sure whether actually requiring it to be present is an LLVM bug or not.The druntime_src_rt_arraydouble_release_32 failure seems to be caused by _arraySliceSliceAddSliceAssign_d not being marked as noinline. No idea why this happens, will look into it. David
May 09 2013
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 18:24:46 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:The druntime_src_rt_arraydouble_release_32 failure seems to be caused by _arraySliceSliceAddSliceAssign_d not being marked as noinline. No idea why this happens, will look into it.I really don't like the llvm::Atributes API – their immutable nature in combined with the function names suggesting mutation makes it really easy to write wrong, but perfectly innocent-looking code. Should be fixed in master. David
May 09 2013
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 21:02:58 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 18:24:46 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:It is also an area with changes in each LLVM release. KaiThe druntime_src_rt_arraydouble_release_32 failure seems to be caused by _arraySliceSliceAddSliceAssign_d not being marked as noinline. No idea why this happens, will look into it.I really don't like the llvm::Atributes API – their immutable nature in combined with the function names suggesting mutation makes it really easy to write wrong, but perfectly innocent-looking code. Should be fixed in master. David
May 10 2013
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 17:56:21 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:The std.digest failures turned out to be caused by TargetTransformInfo not being initialized – not sure whether actually requiring it to be present is an LLVM bug or not. DavidI got a SIGSEV in llvm::SelectionDAG::getMemcpy() while compiling the unittest for std.digest.sha. Is this the same problem? Kai
May 09 2013
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 18:26:49 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 17:56:21 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:Yes, it is. SIGSEV is gone with your latest commit. KaiThe std.digest failures turned out to be caused by TargetTransformInfo not being initialized – not sure whether actually requiring it to be present is an LLVM bug or not. DavidI got a SIGSEV in llvm::SelectionDAG::getMemcpy() while compiling the unittest for std.digest.sha. Is this the same problem? Kai
May 09 2013
Remaining failures: --- 1348 - phobos_std_array_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1352 - phobos_std_array_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1444 - phobos_std_container_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1448 - phobos_std_container_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1509 - phobos_std_bigint_debug_32_build (Failed) 1510 - phobos_std_bigint_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1511 - phobos_std_bigint_release_32_build (Failed) 1512 - phobos_std_bigint_release_32_run (Not Run) 1620 - phobos_std_datetime_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1624 - phobos_std_datetime_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1845 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_debug_32_build (Failed) 1846 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1847 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_release_32_build (Failed) 1848 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_release_32_run (Not Run) 1853 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_debug_32_build (Failed) 1854 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1855 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_release_32_build (Failed) 1856 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_release_32_run (Not Run) --- None of the issues seems to be a 3.3 regression, but we definitely have to do something about https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/328 if it turns out to be an LLVM issue. David
May 09 2013
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 21:56:19 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:Remaining failures: --- 1348 - phobos_std_array_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1352 - phobos_std_array_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1444 - phobos_std_container_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1448 - phobos_std_container_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1509 - phobos_std_bigint_debug_32_build (Failed) 1510 - phobos_std_bigint_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1511 - phobos_std_bigint_release_32_build (Failed) 1512 - phobos_std_bigint_release_32_run (Not Run) 1620 - phobos_std_datetime_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1624 - phobos_std_datetime_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1845 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_debug_32_build (Failed) 1846 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1847 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_release_32_build (Failed) 1848 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_release_32_run (Not Run) 1853 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_debug_32_build (Failed) 1854 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1855 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_release_32_build (Failed) 1856 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_release_32_run (Not Run) --- None of the issues seems to be a 3.3 regression, but we definitely have to do something about https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/328 if it turns out to be an LLVM issue. DavidNow I know that I stumbled across some of the failure (std.array, std.container, std.datetime) while I did the Linux/PPC64 port. I did not pay attention to it because I thought it was a PPC64 problem only.... Kai
May 10 2013
On Friday, 10 May 2013 at 16:14:01 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:Now I know that I stumbled across some of the failure (std.array, std.container, std.datetime) while I did the Linux/PPC64 port. I did not pay attention to it because I thought it was a PPC64 problem only....Without a closer look, it might or might not be the same issue, depending on whether the problem is in the IR-level transformations (unlikely), the LLVM EH codegen or our personality function. I didn't really look at the problem yet For everyone just following this thread: The issue in its reduced triggered as part of normal testsuite runs with 3.3, likely because of the inliner being more aggressive. Kai, do you have time to look into this, or should I try to squeeze it in my schedule for tomorrow? I'd love to be able to release a beta on Sunday, so that we have a stable base to tackle the 2.063 merge (including shared libraries), DDMD, ARM, etc. from. David
May 10 2013
On Friday, 10 May 2013 at 20:37:27 UTC, Michael wrote:Would be nice to try a windows build.Yep, I'm planning to provide a MinGW one as soon as the beta is out. Fixing Linux/OS X has priority now, though. David
May 10 2013
On Friday, 10 May 2013 at 20:37:27 UTC, Michael wrote:Would be nice to try a windows build.If you like you can try this: http://www.redstar.de/ldc/LDC.zip. md5sum: f10de820f9d559b97433cceb0a090663 It is a build with current LDC head and LLVM 3.4 head for Windows 64bit. Issues: - No exception handling. (EH data is generated with --use-seh64, but this crashes often.) - No codeview symbol generation - Requires linker/MS CRT from VS2012 (at least if using zlib code) Kai
May 11 2013
Nice!It is a build with current LDC head and LLVM 3.4 head for Windows 64bit. Issues: - No exception handling. (EH data is generated with --use-seh64, but this crashes often.) - No codeview symbol generation - Requires linker/MS CRT from VS2012 (at least if using zlib code) Kaims stack is not issue)
May 11 2013
On Friday, 10 May 2013 at 19:45:18 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:Kai, do you have time to look into this, or should I try to squeeze it in my schedule for tomorrow? I'd love to be able to release a beta on Sunday, so that we have a stable base to tackle the 2.063 merge (including shared libraries), DDMD, ARM, etc. from. DavidI try. I already reduced the test case. Kai
May 11 2013
In Hello world without switches: d\std\math.d(67): Error: can only import from a module, not from a member of module ldc. Did you mean `import ldc : intrinsics` ? d\std\math.d(68): Error: can only import from a module, not from a member of module ldc. Did you mean `import ldc : llvmasm`? Win 8 64 bit.
May 11 2013
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 21:56:19 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:Remaining failures: --- 1348 - phobos_std_array_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1352 - phobos_std_array_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1444 - phobos_std_container_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1448 - phobos_std_container_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1509 - phobos_std_bigint_debug_32_build (Failed) 1510 - phobos_std_bigint_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1511 - phobos_std_bigint_release_32_build (Failed) 1512 - phobos_std_bigint_release_32_run (Not Run) 1620 - phobos_std_datetime_release_run (SEGFAULT) 1624 - phobos_std_datetime_release_32_run (SEGFAULT) 1845 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_debug_32_build (Failed) 1846 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1847 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_release_32_build (Failed) 1848 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintx86_release_32_run (Not Run) 1853 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_debug_32_build (Failed) 1854 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_debug_32_run (Not Run) 1855 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_release_32_build (Failed) 1856 - phobos_std_internal_math_biguintcore_release_32_run (Not Run) ---In theory all of these should be gone. Running the test suite on a Linux x86_64 multilib build right now, so we can hopefully tick this off the release checklist. David
May 11 2013
On Saturday, 11 May 2013 at 22:28:57 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:In theory all of these should be gone. Running the test suite on a Linux x86_64 multilib build right now, so we can hopefully tick this off the release checklist.Okay, the build is green now. GitHub took the file servers hosting our druntime fork down for maintenance, though, so the CI systems still have to catch up. David
May 11 2013