[llvm-branch-commits] Deleted Mips symbols in the 3.5 branch

[Tom Stellard]

On 12/03/2014 12:24 PM, Daniel Sanders wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Daniel Sanders
>> Sent: 03 December 2014 17:23
>> To: 'Tom Stellard'; Stellard, Thomas; llvm-branch-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>> Subject: RE: Deleted Mips symbols in the 3.5 branch
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Tom Stellard [mailto:thomas.stellard at amd.com]
>>> Sent: 03 December 2014 16:25
>>> To: Daniel Sanders; Stellard, Thomas; llvm-branch-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>> Subject: Re: Deleted Mips symbols in the 3.5 branch
>>>
>>> On 12/03/2014 05:11 AM, Daniel Sanders wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Tom Stellard [mailto:thomas.stellard at amd.com]
>>>>> Sent: 03 December 2014 02:16
>>>>> To: Daniel Sanders; Stellard, Thomas; llvm-branch-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>>>> Subject: Re: Deleted Mips symbols in the 3.5 branch
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/02/2014 05:54 PM, Daniel Sanders wrote:
>>>>>> I could be completely off-track here, but my initial attempts at using
>> abi-
>>>>> compliance-checker on a subset of the public headers (everything in
>>>>> $prefix/include/llvm/Target, and
>>>>> $prefix/include/llvm/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.h) haven't
>>> reported
>>>>> anything other than --prefix related differences and this got me
>> thinking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We only need to worry about symbols that the user can directly access
>>>>> from the definitions in the public (installed) headers and not the whole
>>>>> symbol table, don't we? These symbols are in the symbol table for the
>>>>> shared library, but as far as I can tell there is no definition in the public
>>>>> headers that could enable a user to directly reference anything from
>>>>> $srcdir/lib/Target/Mips (not even the create* functions).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a good point, and I think you are right about this.  I have been
>>>>> using the ABI checker with -objects-only so it wasn't considering the
>>>>> headers at all.  I think we are probably OK then with these deleted
>>> symbols
>>>>> for now, thanks for looking into this and sorry you had to be the guinea
>>> pig.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No problem. I need to learn quite a lot of the implementation detail for
>> C++
>>> anyway and this has been very helpful for that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> It took one hour and 8 GBs of memory, but I got the ABI checker working
>>> with headers.
>>> It looks like there is one patch that breaks the ABI: r223018  In
>>> include/llvm/CodeGen/CallingConvLower, this commits adds new
>> members
>>> to the middle of
>>> enum LocInfo, which changes the values of some existing members.  The
>>> new members should
>>> be added to the end.  Would you be able to fix this?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tom
>>
>> Fixed in r223242.
>
> Nearly forgot to ask. Should I do this for the trunk too?
>

I don't think it is necessary.

-Tom