On 12/03/15 18:07, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4 March 2015 at 18:07, Roland Scheidegger <srol...@vmware.com> wrote:
Am 04.03.2015 um 12:38 schrieb Jose Fonseca:
On 04/03/15 02:00, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 27 February 2015 at 23:28, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Emil Velikov
<emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 07/02/15 21:44, Sedat Dilek wrote:
Hi,
I was building mesa v10.4.4 with my llvm-toolchain v3.6.0rc2.
My build breaks like this...
...
Please cherry-pick...
commit ef7e0b39a24966526b102643523feac765771842
"gallivm: Update for RTDyldMemoryManager becoming an unique_ptr."
..for mesa 10.4 Git branch.
Hi Sedat,
Picking a fix in a stable branch against a non-final release sounds
like
a no-go in our books. As the official llvm 3.6 rolls out we'll pick
this
fix for the stable branches - until then I would recommend (a) applying
it locally or (b) using mesa from the 10.5 or master branch.
Just FYI...
[LLVMdev] LLVM 3.6 Release (see [1]).
Please pick this patch for-10.4, thanks.
As promised, mesa 10.4.6 will feature this.
But is cross-porting this patch enough?
As I said when this first issue was raised fixing the build with LLVM
3.6 is just half of the problem. It must also _run_ correctly. And
building correctly doesn't necessarily means it will run correctly.
That is, unless somebody actually ensures that all LLVM 3.6 related
fixes have been crossported and that things run correctly, it is
misleading to enable the build of Mesa 10.4.6 with LLVM 3.6.
I don't know about radeon drivers, but at least from llvmpipe POV I
simply don't have the time to do this (go through every LLVM 3.6 related
patch, ensure they are all in 10.4.6, and test).
I quickly went through the diffs between 10.4 branch, and found one such
commit is missing:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cgit.freedesktop.org_mesa_mesa_commit_-3Fid-3D74f505fa73eda0c9b5b1984bebb44cedac8e8794&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=Sil2uIufz_rVBrlIPFDCUMC6Wcsupo40k41-Sz85i9k&e=
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.freedesktop.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D85467&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=abTgehf51Ko6ywCLleOeHsxY6igdNHXG4W8PHws8MQU&e=
But there might be more, and I don't know if crossporting this is safe
or not.
Therefore my stance for is that building Mesa stable releases with LLVM
releases after the Mesa release was branched is still unsupported. If
people want to do so, they will do at their own peril. And any incoming
bugs will be "unsupported, use Mesa.
If having a Mesa release capable of building LLVM 3.6 is so important, I
think it might be easier/safer to just make a new release from a recent
enough commit, than trying to backport it.
This is quite right, the above commit is a must if you want to build
with llvm 3.6. I am quite sure crossport should be safe (it missed the
branch point of 10.4 just narrowly), and I don't think there's any other
patches missing, but no guarantees...
I think it is sort of unfortunate that the latest mesa release wouldn't
run with the latest llvm release, but the fact remains that without
testing this sounds all a bit risky...
Thanks for the input gents.
So the input so far we've got is that no-one is testing llvm 3.6 with
mesa 10.4. I love to give it a spin, yet Archlinux doesn't have llvm
3.6 . There is also the double-free bug mentioned in
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.freedesktop.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D89387&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=ce5nAs88nlMkISXKFeoBDzTSKeR3Q9I6sV7AP9COtwQ&e=
All that said, Sedat I will revert the commit and release 10.4.6
without it. On the positive side, mesa 10.5.0 is coming out later on
today, which should work like a charm with llvm 3.6.
As said I switched to mesa v10.5.0.
Just FYI...
Mesa Bug #89387 was fixed by [1]...
commit 70dc8a9930f561d7ce6db7e58b5bc9b4d940e37b
"gallivm: Prevent double delete on LLVM 3.6"
- Sedat -
[1]
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cgit.freedesktop.org_mesa_mesa_patch_-3Fid-3D70dc8a9930f561d7ce6db7e58b5bc9b4d940e37b&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=G9Y99Ju79y8r7f-SEKkY3Fl0dpHU2jXKR3iDRmr7Rvs&e=
On 12/03/15 18:07, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4 March 2015 at 18:07, Roland Scheidegger <srol...@vmware.com> wrote:
Am 04.03.2015 um 12:38 schrieb Jose Fonseca:
On 04/03/15 02:00, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 27 February 2015 at 23:28, Sedat Dilek <sedat.di...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Emil Velikov
<emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 07/02/15 21:44, Sedat Dilek wrote:
Hi,
I was building mesa v10.4.4 with my llvm-toolchain v3.6.0rc2.
My build breaks like this...
...
Please cherry-pick...
commit ef7e0b39a24966526b102643523feac765771842
"gallivm: Update for RTDyldMemoryManager becoming an unique_ptr."
..for mesa 10.4 Git branch.
Hi Sedat,
Picking a fix in a stable branch against a non-final release sounds
like
a no-go in our books. As the official llvm 3.6 rolls out we'll pick
this
fix for the stable branches - until then I would recommend (a) applying
it locally or (b) using mesa from the 10.5 or master branch.
Just FYI...
[LLVMdev] LLVM 3.6 Release (see [1]).
Please pick this patch for-10.4, thanks.
As promised, mesa 10.4.6 will feature this.
But is cross-porting this patch enough?
As I said when this first issue was raised fixing the build with LLVM
3.6 is just half of the problem. It must also _run_ correctly. And
building correctly doesn't necessarily means it will run correctly.
That is, unless somebody actually ensures that all LLVM 3.6 related
fixes have been crossported and that things run correctly, it is
misleading to enable the build of Mesa 10.4.6 with LLVM 3.6.
I don't know about radeon drivers, but at least from llvmpipe POV I
simply don't have the time to do this (go through every LLVM 3.6 related
patch, ensure they are all in 10.4.6, and test).
I quickly went through the diffs between 10.4 branch, and found one such
commit is missing:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cgit.freedesktop.org_mesa_mesa_commit_-3Fid-3D74f505fa73eda0c9b5b1984bebb44cedac8e8794&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=Sil2uIufz_rVBrlIPFDCUMC6Wcsupo40k41-Sz85i9k&e=
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.freedesktop.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D85467&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=abTgehf51Ko6ywCLleOeHsxY6igdNHXG4W8PHws8MQU&e=
But there might be more, and I don't know if crossporting this is safe
or not.
Therefore my stance for is that building Mesa stable releases with LLVM
releases after the Mesa release was branched is still unsupported. If
people want to do so, they will do at their own peril. And any incoming
bugs will be "unsupported, use Mesa.
If having a Mesa release capable of building LLVM 3.6 is so important, I
think it might be easier/safer to just make a new release from a recent
enough commit, than trying to backport it.
This is quite right, the above commit is a must if you want to build
with llvm 3.6. I am quite sure crossport should be safe (it missed the
branch point of 10.4 just narrowly), and I don't think there's any other
patches missing, but no guarantees...
I think it is sort of unfortunate that the latest mesa release wouldn't
run with the latest llvm release, but the fact remains that without
testing this sounds all a bit risky...
Thanks for the input gents.
So the input so far we've got is that no-one is testing llvm 3.6 with
mesa 10.4. I love to give it a spin, yet Archlinux doesn't have llvm
3.6 . There is also the double-free bug mentioned in
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.freedesktop.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D89387&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=ce5nAs88nlMkISXKFeoBDzTSKeR3Q9I6sV7AP9COtwQ&e=
All that said, Sedat I will revert the commit and release 10.4.6
without it. On the positive side, mesa 10.5.0 is coming out later on
today, which should work like a charm with llvm 3.6.
As said I switched to mesa v10.5.0.
Just FYI...
Mesa Bug #89387 was fixed by [1]...
commit 70dc8a9930f561d7ce6db7e58b5bc9b4d940e37b
"gallivm: Prevent double delete on LLVM 3.6"
- Sedat -
[1]
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cgit.freedesktop.org_mesa_mesa_patch_-3Fid-3D70dc8a9930f561d7ce6db7e58b5bc9b4d940e37b&d=AwIBaQ&c=Sqcl0Ez6M0X8aeM67LKIiDJAXVeAw-YihVMNtXt-uEs&r=zfmBZnnVGHeYde45pMKNnVyzeaZbdIqVLprmZCM2zzE&m=mwtTmgdaduzVfVZMIvrzUZfNVLzbS9ds0ks0JUM84a8&s=G9Y99Ju79y8r7f-SEKkY3Fl0dpHU2jXKR3iDRmr7Rvs&e=
Yes, it's safe to crossport this to v10.5.0. I've should add the CC: field.
Jose
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
