[LLVMdev] LLVM on ARM testing.

Karel Gardas karel.gardas at centrum.cz
Fri Jul 8 09:30:15 PDT 2011

On 07/ 8/11 05:26 PM, Eli Friedman wrote:
> Given that revision range, the only remotely likely culprit is 131463.
>   Which basically means that it "broke" because the default target
> features changed.

And you are right here. 131463 == 131464 which is buggy. 131462 is OK.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list