Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Upgrade LLVM #42410

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 16, 2017
Merged

Upgrade LLVM #42410

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 16, 2017

Conversation

nagisa
Copy link
Member

@nagisa nagisa commented Jun 3, 2017

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @brson

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Travis seems to have failed on the newly introduced test. Perhaps it needs to be marked with the llvm greater than marker? https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/jobs/239126530#L1086

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Jun 4, 2017
@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 4, 2017

Technically, it needs a marker for local-vs-system LLVM. I’ll think about it.

@eddyb
Copy link
Member

eddyb commented Jun 4, 2017

@nagisa Don't we have something like that already? cc @alexcrichton

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 4, 2017

@eddyb I can only see instances of min-llvm-version x.y which is not really correct to use in this instance.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

I don't believe we have one already, but it shouldn't be hard to add

@parched
Copy link
Contributor

parched commented Jun 8, 2017

@nagisa Could you consider upgrading to 84c52ce which has my changes in too, to fix ARMv6-M

Includes rust-lang/llvm#80
Includes rust-lang/llvm#79

Also adds tests and thus fixes rust-lang#24194
@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 8, 2017

This is ready, I think.

@sanxiyn
Copy link
Member

sanxiyn commented Jun 10, 2017

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 10, 2017

📌 Commit 7d251d8 has been approved by sanxiyn

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 10, 2017

⌛ Testing commit 7d251d8 with merge 2c3b65c...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 10, 2017

💔 Test failed - status-travis

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Legitimate failure.

[00:57:45] /checkout/src/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.rs:18:17: error: CHECK-NEXT: is not on the line after the previous match
[00:57:45]  // CHECK-NEXT: ret void
[00:57:45]                 ^
[00:57:45] /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.ll:1198:2: note: 'next' match was here
[00:57:45]  ret void
[00:57:45]  ^
[00:57:45] /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.ll:1183:7: note: previous match ended here
[00:57:45] start:
[00:57:45]       ^
[00:57:45] /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.ll:1184:1: note: non-matching line after previous match is here
[00:57:45]  %_7 = alloca %"collections::vec::Vec<u8>"
[00:57:45] ^
[00:57:45] /checkout/src/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.rs:27:17: error: CHECK-NEXT: is not on the line after the previous match
[00:57:45]  // CHECK-NEXT: ret void
[00:57:45]                 ^
[00:57:45] /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.ll:1214:2: note: 'next' match was here
[00:57:45]  ret void
[00:57:45]  ^
[00:57:45] /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.ll:1203:7: note: previous match ended here
[00:57:45] start:
[00:57:45]       ^
[00:57:45] /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.ll:1204:1: note: non-matching line after previous match is here
[00:57:45]  %1 = call i8* @_ZN5alloc4heap15exchange_malloc17h749231974d061700E(i64 4, i64 4)
[00:57:45] ^
[00:57:45]
[00:57:45] ------------------------------------------
[00:57:45]
[00:57:45] thread '[codegen] codegen/alloc-optimisation.rs' panicked at 'explicit panic', /checkout/src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest.rs:2480
[00:57:45] note: Run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` for a backtrace.
[00:57:45]
[00:57:45]
[00:57:45] failures:
[00:57:45]     [codegen] codegen/alloc-optimisation.rs

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 10, 2017

@bors r=sanxiyn

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 10, 2017

📌 Commit 3d15d79 has been approved by sanxiyn

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 10, 2017

⌛ Testing commit 3d15d79 with merge f3c9977...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 10, 2017

💔 Test failed - status-travis

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 10, 2017

@bors r-

never mind

[01:07:14] failures:

[01:07:14] 

[01:07:14] ---- bitvec::bitvec_iter_works_2 stdout ----

[01:07:14] 	thread 'bitvec::bitvec_iter_works_2' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)` (left: `[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319]`, right: `[0, 127, 191, 255, 319]`)', /checkout/src/librustc_data_structures/bitvec.rs:277

[01:07:14] 

[01:07:14] ---- bitvec::bitvec_iter_works stdout ----

[01:07:14] 	thread 'bitvec::bitvec_iter_works' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)` (left: `[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127]`, right: `[1, 10, 19, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 99]`)', /checkout/src/librustc_data_structures/bitvec.rs:264

[01:07:14] note: Run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` for a backtrace.

are the real failures.

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 11, 2017

I cannot reproduce the failures locally. The failure looks super weird to me though. I have a bunch ideas where the problem could be, but with homu being the only way to reproduce the issue it is super hard to try them out.

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 14, 2017

Ok, the issue is exactly where I expected it to be – allocate_zeroed. Too bad that I cannot make it work no matter what I do (I’ve tried both making it a CallocLike and MallocLike), which suggests either some sort of UB in rustc_data_structures when mixed with memory optimisation or a bug in LLVM (unlikely, because calloc works just fine).

I’m not gonna investigate the exact cause of the bug; we can live without optimisation for allocate_zeroed IMO.

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 14, 2017

@bors r=sanxiyn

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 14, 2017

📌 Commit 7aaa22c has been approved by sanxiyn

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 14, 2017

⌛ Testing commit 7aaa22c with merge f520e36...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 14, 2017

💔 Test failed - status-travis

@est31
Copy link
Member

est31 commented Jun 14, 2017

[00:45:38] error: verification with 'FileCheck' failed

[00:45:38] status: exit code: 1

[00:45:38] command: /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/llvm/build/bin/FileCheck -input-file=/checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.ll /checkout/src/test/codegen/alloc-optimisation.rs

Seems legit

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented Jun 15, 2017

@bors r=sanxiyn

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 15, 2017

📌 Commit 406eddf has been approved by sanxiyn

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 15, 2017

⌛ Testing commit 406eddf with merge 885d0f8...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 15, 2017

💔 Test failed - status-travis

@arielb1
Copy link
Contributor

arielb1 commented Jun 16, 2017

Timeout on i686?

@bors retry

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 16, 2017

⌛ Testing commit 406eddf with merge ebbc9ea...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 16, 2017
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 16, 2017

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: sanxiyn
Pushing ebbc9ea to master...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.