On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe < [email protected]> wrote:
> > On 1/20/2015 4:38 PM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 1/20/2015 4:29 PM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 1/20/2015 4:24 PM, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2015 4:16 PM, Alexander Kornienko wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Alexander Kornienko < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 7:44 AM, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Added: cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenOpenCL/spir-calling-conv.cl >>>>> URL: >>>>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenOpenCL/spir-calling-conv.cl?rev=226548&view=auto >>>>> >>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>> --- cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenOpenCL/spir-calling-conv.cl (added) >>>>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenOpenCL/spir-calling-conv.cl Tue Jan 20 >>>>> 00:44:32 2015 >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ >>>>> +// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple "spir-unknown-unknown" -emit-llvm -o - >>>>> | FileCheck %s >>>>> + >>>>> +int get_dummy_id(int D); >>>>> + >>>>> +kernel void bar(global int *A); >>>>> + >>>>> +kernel void foo(global int *A) >>>>> +// CHECK: define spir_kernel void @foo(i32 addrspace(1)* %A) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + int id = get_dummy_id(0); >>>>> + // CHECK: %call = tail call spir_func i32 @get_dummy_id(i32 0) >>>>> >>>> >>>> This test fails >>>> <http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage2-configure-Rlto_check/1183/>. >>>> Please fix or revert. >>>> >>> >>> Clarification: this test fails only in some configurations, thus it >>> doesn't look like a trivial typo in the test which I could fix myself. >>> >>> This is blocking us, so I'm going to revert the revision. >>> >>> >>> Okay, go ahead, then. Looking into it. >>> >>> >>> >> Reverted in r226558. >> >> >>> I just had a look, and the failure looks trivial. The test looks for >>> "%call" as the name of the call instruction, but that particular config >>> seems to produce an anonymous value. Could you retry with a different >>> pattern in the test? It will be hard to test this on my machine. >>> >> >> Yes, I can test it in the setup where it fails. Do you suggest to just >> replace "%call" with "%{{.*}}" or something? >> >> >> Yes, that's correct. The intention is to check for "spir_func" calling >> convention, so anything else that is unpredictable can be matched against a >> regexp. >> > > It works with a bit more specific pattern: "%{{[a-z0-9]+}}". I can > revert the revert and apply the fix. > > > Please do. I won't be able to verify the fix without access to the failing > config. Do note that the same fix will be required for the other call > instruction which calls "@bar" with the "spir_kernel" calling convention. > The check for the @bar call looks a bit different: // CHECK: tail call spir_kernel void @bar(i32 addrspace(1)* %A) There's no "%call = " part in it and it doesn't fail in my setup. > Thanks! > > Sameer. >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
