[llvm-commits] [PATCH] review for fix of profiling test failures on ARM

[NAKAMURA Takumi]

2012/9/13 David Tweed <david.tweed at arm.com>:
> Fair enough: I clearly didn't research the MCJIT status deeply enough. Out
> of curiousity, do the profiling tests pass on those platforms as it stands?
> (I can't find any of those platforms listed on the buildbot page.)

They have been suppressed on Win32-based builders.
I can reproduce crash manually.
http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13830

> | What would happen if -use-mcjit were set by default for arm-elf?
>
> That's a good question, one I don't know the complete answer to yet. In
> general the old JIT doesn't compile runnable code on ARM and the MCJIT does,
> but I don't know if there are any cases where the reverse is true. My
> current focus is looking at the regression test failures as reported by the
> buildbots and seeing how many can be "properly" resolved so they pass and we
> get closer to a more useful default green build on ARM. I'm happy to turn on
> mcjit for ARM Elf in some regression tests that are really testing the
> profiling instruction insertion, but I'd need to do some more comprehensive
> testing before I was happy turning it on for users by default.

I think test/ExecutionEngine should cover then.

> Supposing I was to figure out some magic way to add the -use-mcjit option
> for those tests only on ARM-Linux, would that be a valid way to fix the
> issue in the main tree?

I don't think so. It would be better when -use-mcjit could be turned
on for certain targets.

...Takumi