LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Hi,

I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
field.

-Tom

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Openmp-dev] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
> binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
> have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
> filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
> field.

Windows is ready:

$ sha256sum LLVM-11.0.1-rc1-win*.exe
569bd2f64b3602d4063a05d33548f6a2caef76832c3b330e8f598247c1a196a6
LLVM-11.0.1-rc1-win32.exe
49cdd286dae24437c18e9edf8a8f3306ac8448bf132574739b39b6aa21f3f52d
LLVM-11.0.1-rc1-win64.exe

They were built using the attached script.

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

build_llvm_1101-rc1._bat_ (6K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev

Uploaded Ubuntu 20.10.

sha256sum clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-20.10.tar.xz
48261f8e4b3963c8c69733a4dcd4ceaba1eecfa2b64bb9b1fb9b883fd6a475ce

From testing.11.0.1-rc1.log

FAIL: SanitizerCommon-Unit :: ./Sanitizer-x86_64-Test/SanitizerLinux.ThreadDescriptorSize (66416 of 71964)
******************** TEST 'SanitizerCommon-Unit :: ./Sanitizer-x86_64-Test/SanitizerLinux.ThreadDescriptorSize' FAILED ********************
Note: Google Test filter = SanitizerLinux.ThreadDescriptorSize
[==========] Running 1 test from 1 test case.
[----------] Global test environment set-up.
[----------] 1 test from SanitizerLinux
[ RUN      ] SanitizerLinux.ThreadDescriptorSize
/home/nnelson/Documents/llvm-project/llvm/utils/release/rc1/llvm-project/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/tests/sanitizer_linux_test.cpp:222: Failure
      Expected: (uptr)result
      Which is: 2496
To be equal to: ThreadDescriptorSize()
      Which is: 2304
[  FAILED  ] SanitizerLinux.ThreadDescriptorSize (10 ms)
[----------] 1 test from SanitizerLinux (10 ms total)

[----------] Global test environment tear-down
[==========] 1 test from 1 test case ran. (10 ms total)
[  PASSED  ] 0 tests.
[  FAILED  ] 1 test, listed below:
[  FAILED  ] SanitizerLinux.ThreadDescriptorSize

 1 FAILED TEST

********************
Testing:  0.. 10.. 20.. 30.. 40.. 50.. 60.. 70.. 80.. 90..
********************
Failed Tests (1):
  SanitizerCommon-Unit :: ./Sanitizer-x86_64-Test/SanitizerLinux.ThreadDescriptorSize


Testing Time: 338.33s
  Unsupported      :  1766
  Passed           : 69949
  Expectedly Failed:   248
  Failed           :     1

/home/nnelson/Documents/llvm-project/llvm/utils/release/rc1/llvm-test-suite/MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C++/CLAMR/memstats.c:60:10: fatal error: 'sys/sysctl.h' file not found
#include <sys/sysctl.h>

When running llvm-test-suite

/home/nnelson/Documents/llvm-project/llvm/utils/release/rc1/llvm-test-suite/MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C++/CLAMR/memstats.c:60:10: fatal error: 'sys/sysctl.h' file not found
#include <sys/sysctl.h>
         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[ 30%] Linking C executable lpbench
1 error generated.
make[2]: *** [MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C++/CLAMR/CMakeFiles/CLAMR.dir/build.make:362: MultiSource/Benchmarks/DOE-ProxyApps-C++/CLAMR/CMakeFiles/CLAMR.dir/memstats.c.o] Error 1

On 11/26/20 12:21 AM, Tom Stellard via cfe-dev wrote:
Hi,

I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks' field.

-Tom

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev
On 26 Nov 2020, at 08:21, Tom Stellard via Release-testers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks' field.

For 11.0.1 rc1, I have built and tested on both FreeBSD 11 and 12 this time. No additional patches were needed.


Main results on amd64-freebsd11:

  Unsupported        :  5122 (11.0.0 final:  5122)
  Passed             : 69779 (11.0.0 final: 69765)
  Expectedly Failed  :   245 (11.0.0 final:   245)
  Timed Out          :    16 (11.0.0 final:    16)
  Failed             :   478 (11.0.0 final:   479)
  Unexpectedly Passed:     2 (11.0.0 final:     2)

Test suite results on amd64-freebsd11:

  Passed: 2400 (11.0.0 final: 2400)
  Failed:    2 (11.0.0 final:    2)


Main results on amd64-freebsd12:

  Unsupported        :  5122
  Passed             : 69776
  Expectedly Failed  :   245
  Timed Out          :    16
  Failed             :   481
  Unexpectedly Passed:     2

Test suite results on amd64-freebsd12:

  Passed: 2399
  Failed:    3


Main results on i386-freebsd11:

  Unsupported        :  3512
  Passed             : 66597
  Expectedly Failed  :   230
  Timed Out          :     7
  Failed             :   322
  Unexpectedly Passed:     1


Uploaded:
SHA256 (clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-amd64-unknown-freebsd11.tar.xz) = 92d956dbe14176c8defeb32c03449ed61a42eb0ba0b500784fff6f8a62b00f01
SHA256 (clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-amd64-unknown-freebsd12.tar.xz) = 7d38dcbe47d62da3dd555516ed31e5749edb952163e9c66cc3b12926a78e8f88
SHA256 (clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-i386-unknown-freebsd11.tar.xz) = 2e80d8d6c7178374696c67e2fea6a7d9cadf68bca08e07238b814d46cea09fa3
SHA256 (clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-i386-unknown-freebsd12.tar.xz) = b3d4ca7539f3e29a47b8f724503223051e6a62157b966afa6a4aba9a89400ef7

-Dimitry


_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

signature.asc (230 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Hello
is there a place to download a LLVM clang which target IBM AIX PowerPC?

Le jeu. 26 nov. 2020 à 08:21, Tom Stellard via Release-testers <[hidden email]> a écrit :
Hi,

I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
field.

-Tom

_______________________________________________
Release-testers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [llvm-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev
On Windows we're building two different packages (32-bit and 64-bit) in the same script [1], perhaps the same should be done here? Smaller packages is better?

[1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/master/llvm/utils/release/build_llvm_package.bat

-----Message d'origine-----
De : llvm-dev <[hidden email]> De la part de Tobias Hieta via llvm-dev
Envoyé : December 1, 2020 10:13 AM
À : [hidden email]
Cc : llvm-dev <[hidden email]>; Release-testers <[hidden email]>; clang developer list <[hidden email]>
Objet : Re: [llvm-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

I just realized that we should probably make an arm64 build as well for those new fancy mac's.

What do people think is the best solution here, a fat universal build that will be double the size (currently llvm+clang is already ~400MB packed so it will be very big), or two separate builds?

The pro of having two separate builds is that we can set the correct default triple instead of a single one, the downside is that I need to build it twice for every version.

-- Tobias

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:03 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Tom,
>
> MacOS build: clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
> with SHA256:
> c9ee87d7e42df8494a9f42993ed499479b3ce118c940a6e8907d075ceb913223
> is uploaded.
>
> The same tests as before failed:
>
> FAIL: libunwind :: libunwind_01.pass.cpp (69255 of 69302)
> FAIL: libunwind :: signal_frame.pass.cpp (69258 of 69302)
>
> I had to use the following patch to use Python 3:
>
> diff --git a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> index 357b18a205d..96c0c3a1da7 100644
> --- a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> +++ b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ if config.operating_system == 'Darwin':
> cmd = subprocess.Popen(['xcrun', '--show-sdk-path'],
> stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) out, err =
> cmd.communicate()
> - out = out.strip()
> + out = out.strip().decode()
> res = cmd.wait()
> if res == 0 and out:
> config.test_flags += " -isysroot " + out
>
> otherwise tests failed to run.
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and
> > uploading binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM
> > 11.0.1, you have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make
> > these requests by filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
> > field.
> >
> > -Tom
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Release-testers mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev
I think the separate packages make the most sense.

Also, how would one practically go about doing the fat binary
approach? Is there some cmake magic that would make it
straight-forward?

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:13 PM Tobias Hieta via Release-testers
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I just realized that we should probably make an arm64 build as well
> for those new fancy mac's.
>
> What do people think is the best solution here, a fat universal build
> that will be double the size (currently llvm+clang is already ~400MB
> packed so it will be very big), or two separate builds?
>
> The pro of having two separate builds is that we can set the correct
> default triple instead of a single one, the downside is that I need to
> build it twice for every version.
>
> -- Tobias
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:03 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Tom,
> >
> > MacOS build: clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
> > with SHA256: c9ee87d7e42df8494a9f42993ed499479b3ce118c940a6e8907d075ceb913223
> > is uploaded.
> >
> > The same tests as before failed:
> >
> > FAIL: libunwind :: libunwind_01.pass.cpp (69255 of 69302)
> > FAIL: libunwind :: signal_frame.pass.cpp (69258 of 69302)
> >
> > I had to use the following patch to use Python 3:
> >
> > diff --git a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> > index 357b18a205d..96c0c3a1da7 100644
> > --- a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> > +++ b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ if config.operating_system == 'Darwin':
> > cmd = subprocess.Popen(['xcrun', '--show-sdk-path'],
> > stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
> > out, err = cmd.communicate()
> > - out = out.strip()
> > + out = out.strip().decode()
> > res = cmd.wait()
> > if res == 0 and out:
> > config.test_flags += " -isysroot " + out
> >
> > otherwise tests failed to run.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
> > > binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
> > > have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
> > > filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
> > > field.
> > >
> > > -Tom
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Release-testers mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
> _______________________________________________
> Release-testers mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Hmm, but unless you're doing this on an arm64 machine, you won't be
able to run the tests in Phase2 and 3?

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:36 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Yeah you can pass -DCMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES=arm64;x86_64 and it will
> make fat binaries.
>
> But it seems like we should probably do two packages. That probably
> needs to be implemented in the test-release in the following way:
>
> Build Phase1 for the host currently running on. Then build Phase2 and
> 3 for the target (arm64) and compare those.
>
> Anything I am not thinking about here or missing?
>
> -- Tobias
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:32 PM Hans Wennborg <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I think the separate packages make the most sense.
> >
> > Also, how would one practically go about doing the fat binary
> > approach? Is there some cmake magic that would make it
> > straight-forward?
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:13 PM Tobias Hieta via Release-testers
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I just realized that we should probably make an arm64 build as well
> > > for those new fancy mac's.
> > >
> > > What do people think is the best solution here, a fat universal build
> > > that will be double the size (currently llvm+clang is already ~400MB
> > > packed so it will be very big), or two separate builds?
> > >
> > > The pro of having two separate builds is that we can set the correct
> > > default triple instead of a single one, the downside is that I need to
> > > build it twice for every version.
> > >
> > > -- Tobias
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:03 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Tom,
> > > >
> > > > MacOS build: clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
> > > > with SHA256: c9ee87d7e42df8494a9f42993ed499479b3ce118c940a6e8907d075ceb913223
> > > > is uploaded.
> > > >
> > > > The same tests as before failed:
> > > >
> > > > FAIL: libunwind :: libunwind_01.pass.cpp (69255 of 69302)
> > > > FAIL: libunwind :: signal_frame.pass.cpp (69258 of 69302)
> > > >
> > > > I had to use the following patch to use Python 3:
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> > > > index 357b18a205d..96c0c3a1da7 100644
> > > > --- a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> > > > +++ b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
> > > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ if config.operating_system == 'Darwin':
> > > > cmd = subprocess.Popen(['xcrun', '--show-sdk-path'],
> > > > stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
> > > > out, err = cmd.communicate()
> > > > - out = out.strip()
> > > > + out = out.strip().decode()
> > > > res = cmd.wait()
> > > > if res == 0 and out:
> > > > config.test_flags += " -isysroot " + out
> > > >
> > > > otherwise tests failed to run.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers
> > > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
> > > > > binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
> > > > > have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
> > > > > filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
> > > > > field.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Tom
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Release-testers mailing list
> > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Release-testers mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Nico has an M1 and I think he looked at building LLVM on it too.
Perhaps he can help out.

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 7:49 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Thats a very good point.
>
> Maybe someone with an M1 machine can take on the task of testing releases on those? I would happily do that but I don't have such a machine and can't afford one right now unfortunately.
>
> -- Tobias
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020, 19:21 Hans Wennborg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, but unless you're doing this on an arm64 machine, you won't be
>> able to run the tests in Phase2 and 3?
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:36 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Yeah you can pass -DCMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES=arm64;x86_64 and it will
>> > make fat binaries.
>> >
>> > But it seems like we should probably do two packages. That probably
>> > needs to be implemented in the test-release in the following way:
>> >
>> > Build Phase1 for the host currently running on. Then build Phase2 and
>> > 3 for the target (arm64) and compare those.
>> >
>> > Anything I am not thinking about here or missing?
>> >
>> > -- Tobias
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:32 PM Hans Wennborg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I think the separate packages make the most sense.
>> > >
>> > > Also, how would one practically go about doing the fat binary
>> > > approach? Is there some cmake magic that would make it
>> > > straight-forward?
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:13 PM Tobias Hieta via Release-testers
>> > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I just realized that we should probably make an arm64 build as well
>> > > > for those new fancy mac's.
>> > > >
>> > > > What do people think is the best solution here, a fat universal build
>> > > > that will be double the size (currently llvm+clang is already ~400MB
>> > > > packed so it will be very big), or two separate builds?
>> > > >
>> > > > The pro of having two separate builds is that we can set the correct
>> > > > default triple instead of a single one, the downside is that I need to
>> > > > build it twice for every version.
>> > > >
>> > > > -- Tobias
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:03 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Tom,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > MacOS build: clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
>> > > > > with SHA256: c9ee87d7e42df8494a9f42993ed499479b3ce118c940a6e8907d075ceb913223
>> > > > > is uploaded.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > The same tests as before failed:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: libunwind_01.pass.cpp (69255 of 69302)
>> > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: signal_frame.pass.cpp (69258 of 69302)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I had to use the following patch to use Python 3:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > diff --git a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
>> > > > > index 357b18a205d..96c0c3a1da7 100644
>> > > > > --- a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
>> > > > > +++ b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
>> > > > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ if config.operating_system == 'Darwin':
>> > > > > cmd = subprocess.Popen(['xcrun', '--show-sdk-path'],
>> > > > > stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
>> > > > > out, err = cmd.communicate()
>> > > > > - out = out.strip()
>> > > > > + out = out.strip().decode()
>> > > > > res = cmd.wait()
>> > > > > if res == 0 and out:
>> > > > > config.test_flags += " -isysroot " + out
>> > > > >
>> > > > > otherwise tests failed to run.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers
>> > > > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
>> > > > > > binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
>> > > > > > have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
>> > > > > > filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
>> > > > > > field.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > -Tom
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > Release-testers mailing list
>> > > > > > [hidden email]
>> > > > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > Release-testers mailing list
>> > > > [hidden email]
>> > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Sure, can do. I know that tests don't currently pass on M1s on trunk:
check-lld is fine, haven't tried anything else yet. What would the goal be? Make sure the 11.0 branch isn't worse than trunk?


On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 2:15 PM Hans Wennborg <[hidden email]> wrote:
Nico has an M1 and I think he looked at building LLVM on it too.
Perhaps he can help out.

On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 7:49 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Thats a very good point.
>
> Maybe someone with an M1 machine can take on the task of testing releases on those? I would happily do that but I don't have such a machine and can't afford one right now unfortunately.
>
> -- Tobias
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020, 19:21 Hans Wennborg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, but unless you're doing this on an arm64 machine, you won't be
>> able to run the tests in Phase2 and 3?
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:36 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Yeah you can pass -DCMAKE_OSX_ARCHITECTURES=arm64;x86_64 and it will
>> > make fat binaries.
>> >
>> > But it seems like we should probably do two packages. That probably
>> > needs to be implemented in the test-release in the following way:
>> >
>> > Build Phase1 for the host currently running on. Then build Phase2 and
>> > 3 for the target (arm64) and compare those.
>> >
>> > Anything I am not thinking about here or missing?
>> >
>> > -- Tobias
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:32 PM Hans Wennborg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I think the separate packages make the most sense.
>> > >
>> > > Also, how would one practically go about doing the fat binary
>> > > approach? Is there some cmake magic that would make it
>> > > straight-forward?
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:13 PM Tobias Hieta via Release-testers
>> > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I just realized that we should probably make an arm64 build as well
>> > > > for those new fancy mac's.
>> > > >
>> > > > What do people think is the best solution here, a fat universal build
>> > > > that will be double the size (currently llvm+clang is already ~400MB
>> > > > packed so it will be very big), or two separate builds?
>> > > >
>> > > > The pro of having two separate builds is that we can set the correct
>> > > > default triple instead of a single one, the downside is that I need to
>> > > > build it twice for every version.
>> > > >
>> > > > -- Tobias
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 4:03 PM Tobias Hieta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Tom,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > MacOS build: clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-apple-darwin.tar.xz
>> > > > > with SHA256: c9ee87d7e42df8494a9f42993ed499479b3ce118c940a6e8907d075ceb913223
>> > > > > is uploaded.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > The same tests as before failed:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: libunwind_01.pass.cpp (69255 of 69302)
>> > > > > FAIL: libunwind :: signal_frame.pass.cpp (69258 of 69302)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I had to use the following patch to use Python 3:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > diff --git a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
>> > > > > index 357b18a205d..96c0c3a1da7 100644
>> > > > > --- a/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
>> > > > > +++ b/openmp/runtime/test/lit.cfg
>> > > > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ if config.operating_system == 'Darwin':
>> > > > > cmd = subprocess.Popen(['xcrun', '--show-sdk-path'],
>> > > > > stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
>> > > > > out, err = cmd.communicate()
>> > > > > - out = out.strip()
>> > > > > + out = out.strip().decode()
>> > > > > res = cmd.wait()
>> > > > > if res == 0 and out:
>> > > > > config.test_flags += " -isysroot " + out
>> > > > >
>> > > > > otherwise tests failed to run.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers
>> > > > > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
>> > > > > > binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
>> > > > > > have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
>> > > > > > filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
>> > > > > > field.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > -Tom
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > Release-testers mailing list
>> > > > > > [hidden email]
>> > > > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > Release-testers mailing list
>> > > > [hidden email]
>> > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Hi,

I finished testing llvm-11.0.1-rc1 on Power PC 64bit Little Endian for
- Ubuntu 18.04
- Red Hat 7.4
I have uploaded the binaries from IBM. The sha1 files are attached.


Thanks,
Ahsan Saghir.

On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 02:21, Tom Stellard via Release-testers <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
field.

-Tom

_______________________________________________
Release-testers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-powerpc64le-linux-rhel-7.4.sha1 (134 bytes) Download Attachment
clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-powerpc64le-linux-ubuntu-18.04.sha1 (138 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev
On Thursday, November 26, 2020 08:21 CET, Tom Stellard via Release-testers <[hidden email]> wrote:
 
> Hi,
>
> I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.

Hi,
I've updated OpenMandriva and rebuilt all packages, no regressions from 11.0.0 detected on all arches.

ttyl
bero

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Hi,

I've uploaded binaries for armv7 & aarch64. No regressions compared to 11.0.0.

73c25494b8632a8969504522d2fc444118768e129e8307920b7fa9cdd7c70649  clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.xz
2e0244f55914383767f6ce9ef745ba9040beab82a71d430ff0844ef58993e504  clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-armv7a-linux-gnueabihf.tar.xz

Cheers,
Diana

On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 at 01:01, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer via cfe-dev <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thursday, November 26, 2020 08:21 CET, Tom Stellard via Release-testers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.

Hi,
I've updated OpenMandriva and rebuilt all packages, no regressions from 11.0.0 detected on all arches.

ttyl
bero

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Release-testers] LLVM 11.0.1-rc1 has been tagged

shirley breuer via cfe-dev
In reply to this post by shirley breuer via cfe-dev
Uploaded Ubuntu 16 tarball:

dcd37b46d2b3002d078ff38d967e674f4837090c4f61ee403f2cb0ada6a6dbd2  clang+llvm-11.0.1-rc1-x86_64-linux-gnu-ubuntu-16.04.tar.xz

BTW - Neil -- if you decide to post binaries for Ubuntu 20, you should know that there was a request in another thread to include LLDB in the ubuntu packages.  The ubuntu binaries  I've made do include it (test-release takes an "-lldb" arg).


On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 1:21 AM Tom Stellard via Release-testers <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I've tagged LLVM 11.0.1-rc1.  Testers may begin testing and uploading
binaries.  If you still have bugs you want fixed in LLVM 11.0.1, you
have until Dec. 8 to request backports.  You can make these requests by
filing a bug at bugs.llvm.org and putting release-11.0.1 in the 'blocks'
field.

-Tom

_______________________________________________
Release-testers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/release-testers


--
-Brian

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev