Much or all of "Bitcode/simd_ops/simd_ops_*.test" (254 failures) seem to be
failing for me with SIGILL. I'm guessing that my host CPU doesn't support
the instructions we're testing?
Is there already a bug on this failure? Are there any CPUID-style feature
detection flags I can easily add to mark
I'm not aware of a bug filed for this, so please file one. I don't
know much about the workings of test-suite myself, though.
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Brian Cain wrote:
> Much or all of "Bitcode/simd_ops/simd_ops_*.test" (254 failures) seem to be
> failing for me with SIGILL. I'm guessin
+CC Alina
Maybe the bitcode is generated too aggressively and we should find ways to
disable the Bitcode tests if the host CPU isn't new enough (or alternatively
disable the bitcode tests by default and only enable them when someone asks for
them via TEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS?)
- Matthias
> On Aug 1
Hi,
We've been having trouble with some strange lldb failures when building lldb
with -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB=ON. For example, this command segfaults
with -DLLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB=ON but not if we omit that option:
echo "int main(void) { return 0; }" | gcc -x c -g - && \
lldb -b a.out -o 'b ma
Opened https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34168
rc2 uploaded
to /home/testers/uploads/clang+llvm-5.0.0-rc2-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
-- I tried to use /data/testers-uploads/ but that failed.
292e39fe52d7404fcd5cd962cf8917600d45f507
rc2/clang+llvm-5.0.0-rc2-linux-x86_64-sles11.3.tar.xz
On
