[llvm-dev] [RFC] migrating past C++11 (original) (raw)

James Y Knight via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Feb 7 13:38:29 PST 2019

Hooray! Thanks for perservering!

On Thu, Feb 7, 2019, 1:28 PM JF Bastien via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

Indeed this has finally stuck, with just clang-with-lto-ubuntu broken at the moment. I’m inclined to leave it checked in, and try to get it into the LLVM 8 branch as well.

On Feb 7, 2019, at 9:18 AM, paul.robinson at sony.com wrote: It seems the CMake changes have landed; but the docs are still a bit out of date? CMake.html talks about LLVMFORCEUSEOLDTOOLCHAIN but not LLVMTEMPORARILYALLOWOLDTOOLCHAIN. I’m. Not sure how one updates the website’s docs, I had assumed the RST files would automatically get rebuilt and pushed? Agreed we want it fixed, but I don’t think it’s good reason to revert since the error message is pretty clear. Also, it looks like LLVMTEMPORARILYALLOWOLDTOOLCHAIN is not propagated down to the NATIVE configuration when you set LLVMOPTIMIZEDTABLEGEN. If that's going to be a permanent deficiency, it should be mentioned in the docs as well. Someone mentioned MSVC was having issues that way? https://reviews.llvm.org/rL353374#624722 That seems like general badness in the way that configuration is set up, no? It should probably get fixed separately. Thanks, --paulr From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org>] *On Behalf Of *JF Bastien via llvm-dev Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2019 1:04 AM To: via llvm-dev Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] migrating past C++11 After a few attempts I think we’re in sight of success: we only have the two following bots remaining with old versions of libstdc++ and new versions of clang: polly-amd64-linux polly-arm-linux Once fixed the toolchain bump should stick. On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:07 PM, JF Bastien via llvm-dev <_ _llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

On Jan 31, 2019, at 2:03 PM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 21:05, JF Bastien via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: The patch is about ready to land, which means any older compiler will soft-error (which you can turn off with LLVMTEMPORARILYALLOWOLDTOOLCHAIN). I think we should then cherry-pick the patch to the LLVM 8 branch. The last remaining issue are the buildbots. I audited all bots in http://lab.llvm.org:8011/buildslaves (there's so many!). Some of them are down, I therefore have no idea what they run. Here are the bots that will definitely break, with their maintainers: Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> am1i-slv1 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 as-bldslv4 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) ps4-buildslave2 -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) Hexagon QA <llvm.buildmaster at quicinc.com> hexagon-build-02 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 hexagon-build-03 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.9.2-10ubuntu13) 4.9.2 Vitaly Buka <vitalybuka at google.com> sanitizer-buildbot6 -- gcc (Ubuntu 4.8.4-2ubuntu1~14.04.3) 4.8.4 Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> sanitizer-windows -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) Ilia Taraban <mstester.llvm at gmail.com> windows7-buildbot -- Microsoft (R) Visual Studio (R) 2015 (14.0) The maintainers have 3 options: 1. Pass LLVMTEMPORARILYALLOWOLDTOOLCHAIN to their bot, suffer breakage later. 2. Update the bot to a newer compiler version. 3. Entirely turn down the bot. I’ve emailed the maintainers and some have already responded. Once all bots are in a good state I’ll commit the patch (unless someone else chimes in with new information). Did anyone pick option 1)? If I understand correctly, we probably want to ensure that at least some bots do this, so we can ensure an old compiler + LLVMTEMPORARILYALLOWOLDTOOLCHAIN build actually remains functional up until the point support for the old compiler is actually removed. Reid asked me to do so for sanitizer-windows: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57525 Ideally yes we’d have bots covering all eventualities, but this is but one of many holes in our coverage. On the upside, that hole is disappearing in a few months :) Best, Alex

LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190207/72c106f9/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list