Re: Potential self-hosting failure
On 17 May 2017 at 18:07, John Brawn wrote: > I've now tracked this down to a problem with LEApcrel rematerialization > where the rematerialized LEApcrel can address a different literal pool > to the original. I've raised https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33074 Sounds nasty! > This is actually a bug that already existed before my patches, but because > my patches made LEApcrel be rematerialized in more situations they made it > more likely to trigger the bug. I'll continue looking into this to see if > I can figure out how to fix it. Thanks John! --renato ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
RE: Potential self-hosting failure
I've now tracked this down to a problem with LEApcrel rematerialization where the rematerialized LEApcrel can address a different literal pool to the original. I've raised https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33074 This is actually a bug that already existed before my patches, but because my patches made LEApcrel be rematerialized in more situations they made it more likely to trigger the bug. I'll continue looking into this to see if I can figure out how to fix it. John > -Original Message- > From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.go...@linaro.org] > Sent: 16 May 2017 19:13 > To: John Brawn > Cc: James Molloy; Diana Picus; LLVM Commits; Clang Commits; nd > Subject: Re: Potential self-hosting failure > > On 16 May 2017 at 18:26, John Brawn wrote: > > I've managed to reproduce this, but no luck so far in figuring out > > what exactly is going wrong. I'll continue looking into it tomorrow. > > Thanks John, > > I have reverted it for now on r303193, to get the bots green. > > cheers, > --renato ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: Potential self-hosting failure
On 16 May 2017 at 18:26, John Brawn wrote: > I've managed to reproduce this, but no luck so far in figuring out > what exactly is going wrong. I'll continue looking into it tomorrow. Thanks John, I have reverted it for now on r303193, to get the bots green. cheers, --renato ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
RE: Potential self-hosting failure
I've managed to reproduce this, but no luck so far in figuring out what exactly is going wrong. I'll continue looking into it tomorrow. John > -Original Message- > From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.go...@linaro.org] > Sent: 16 May 2017 12:18 > To: John Brawn > Cc: James Molloy; Diana Picus; LLVM Commits; Clang Commits > Subject: Potential self-hosting failure > > Hi John, > > It seems the LEApcrel patches have broken our self-hosting: > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-thumbv7-a15-full- > sh/builds/1550 > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15-selfhost- > neon/builds/1349 > > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15- > selfhost/builds/1845 > > The range in each is big, but the overlapping range is actually just > 303051 ~ 303054. > > Since two of those patches are yours and since this is a self-hosting > issue, my money is on your patches, not the Dwarf one. :) > > The tests don't help much, unfortunately. > > I have had problems like this in Clang, where the code assumed some > ABI that wasn't as generic as initially assumed, and changes in > relocation are normally the ones that expose those wrong assumptions. > > Can you have a look on your side, while we're testing on our side, too? > > Thanks! > --renato ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Potential self-hosting failure
Hi John, It seems the LEApcrel patches have broken our self-hosting: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-thumbv7-a15-full-sh/builds/1550 http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15-selfhost-neon/builds/1349 http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-armv7-a15-selfhost/builds/1845 The range in each is big, but the overlapping range is actually just 303051 ~ 303054. Since two of those patches are yours and since this is a self-hosting issue, my money is on your patches, not the Dwarf one. :) The tests don't help much, unfortunately. I have had problems like this in Clang, where the code assumed some ABI that wasn't as generic as initially assumed, and changes in relocation are normally the ones that expose those wrong assumptions. Can you have a look on your side, while we're testing on our side, too? Thanks! --renato ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
