r261774 - Bail on compilation as soon as a job fails.
Steven Wu via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon May 15 10:32:15 PDT 2017
Hi Nico
Now that r262420 is landed. Is there any plan to move CUDA to the new approach so we can fix the UNIX conformance test?
Thanks
Steven
> On Apr 22, 2017, at 8:08 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits <cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via cfe-commits <cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> [Some necromancy here...]
>
> This commit effectively reverted r173361 and r173825, breaking UNIX conformance for our c99 wrapper.
>
> See:
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/c99.html <http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/c99.html>
>> When c99 encounters a compilation error that causes an object file not to be created, it shall write a diagnostic to standard error and continue to compile other source code operands, but it shall not perform the link phase and it shall return a non-zero exit status.
>
>
> We had a test, but this commit changed that as well (I suppose it could have been better documented).
>
> How easily could this be restricted to only affect CUDA jobs?
>
> If this gets reverted, the clang-cl PCH code needs to use the approach in https://reviews.llvm.org/D17695 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D17695> before I rebased that patch over this revision here, so that a PCH compilation failure stops the compilation of the main TU.
>
>
>> On Feb 24, 2016, at 13:49, Justin Lebar via cfe-commits <cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Author: jlebar
>> Date: Wed Feb 24 15:49:28 2016
>> New Revision: 261774
>>
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=261774&view=rev <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=261774&view=rev>
>> Log:
>> Bail on compilation as soon as a job fails.
>>
>> Summary:
>> (Re-land of r260448, which was reverted in r260522 due to a test failure
>> in Driver/output-file-cleanup.c that only showed up in fresh builds.)
>>
>> Previously we attempted to be smart; if one job failed, we'd run all
>> jobs that didn't depend on the failing job.
>>
>> Problem is, this doesn't work well for e.g. CUDA compilation without
>> -save-temps. In this case, the device-side and host-side Assemble
>> actions (which actually are responsible for preprocess, compile,
>> backend, and assemble, since we're not saving temps) are necessarily
>> distinct. So our clever heuristic doesn't help us, and we repeat every
>> error message once for host and once for each device arch.
>>
>> The main effect of this change, other than fixing CUDA, is that if you
>> pass multiple cc files to one instance of clang and you get a compile
>> error, we'll stop when the first cc1 job fails.
>>
>> Reviewers: echristo
>>
>> Subscribers: cfe-commits, jhen, echristo, tra, rafael
>>
>> Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17217 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D17217>
>>
>> Modified:
>> cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp
>> cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c
>>
>> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff>
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp Wed Feb 24 15:49:28 2016
>> @@ -163,39 +163,17 @@ int Compilation::ExecuteCommand(const Co
>> return ExecutionFailed ? 1 : Res;
>> }
>>
>> -typedef SmallVectorImpl< std::pair<int, const Command *> > FailingCommandList;
>> -
>> -static bool ActionFailed(const Action *A,
>> - const FailingCommandList &FailingCommands) {
>> -
>> - if (FailingCommands.empty())
>> - return false;
>> -
>> - for (FailingCommandList::const_iterator CI = FailingCommands.begin(),
>> - CE = FailingCommands.end(); CI != CE; ++CI)
>> - if (A == &(CI->second->getSource()))
>> - return true;
>> -
>> - for (const Action *AI : A->inputs())
>> - if (ActionFailed(AI, FailingCommands))
>> - return true;
>> -
>> - return false;
>> -}
>> -
>> -static bool InputsOk(const Command &C,
>> - const FailingCommandList &FailingCommands) {
>> - return !ActionFailed(&C.getSource(), FailingCommands);
>> -}
>> -
>> -void Compilation::ExecuteJobs(const JobList &Jobs,
>> - FailingCommandList &FailingCommands) const {
>> +void Compilation::ExecuteJobs(
>> + const JobList &Jobs,
>> + SmallVectorImpl<std::pair<int, const Command *>> &FailingCommands) const {
>> for (const auto &Job : Jobs) {
>> - if (!InputsOk(Job, FailingCommands))
>> - continue;
>> const Command *FailingCommand = nullptr;
>> - if (int Res = ExecuteCommand(Job, FailingCommand))
>> + if (int Res = ExecuteCommand(Job, FailingCommand)) {
>> FailingCommands.push_back(std::make_pair(Res, FailingCommand));
>> + // Bail as soon as one command fails, so we don't output duplicate error
>> + // messages if we die on e.g. the same file.
>> + return;
>> + }
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff>
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c Wed Feb 24 15:49:28 2016
>> @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@ invalid C code
>> // RUN: test -f %t1.s
>> // RUN: test ! -f %t2.s
>>
>> +// When given multiple .c files to compile, clang compiles them in order until
>> +// it hits an error, at which point it stops.
>> +//
>> // RUN: touch %t1.c
>> // RUN: echo "invalid C code" > %t2.c
>> // RUN: touch %t3.c
>> @@ -46,6 +49,6 @@ invalid C code
>> // RUN: cd %T && not %clang -S %t1.c %t2.c %t3.c %t4.c %t5.c
>> // RUN: test -f %t1.s
>> // RUN: test ! -f %t2.s
>> -// RUN: test -f %t3.s
>> +// RUN: test ! -f %t3.s
>> // RUN: test ! -f %t4.s
>> -// RUN: test -f %t5.s
>> +// RUN: test ! -f %t5.s
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20170515/41290150/attachment.html>
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list