[llvm-dev] Codegen difference between Asserts and No-Asserts mode

[Sumanth Gundapaneni via llvm-dev]

Thanks for the information Greg. I will look in to this further.

 

--Sumanth G

From: Greg Bedwell [mailto:gregbedwell at gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 7:01 AM
To: Hal Finkel
Cc: Sumanth Gundapaneni; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Russell Gallop
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Codegen difference between Asserts and No-Asserts mode

 

I imagine that the Clang "Check Compile Flow Consistency" tool (tools/clang/utils/check_cfc) would be a good fit for this sort of testing.  It's currently used to verify that adding -g does not affect codegen or that compiling via a .s file produces the same codegen as a directly emitted object, so it may not be too much of a stretch to use it to verify that two different sets of compiler binaries produce identical codegen.  Obviously you'd need a bot that was building both sets of executables first.  Unfortunately, I don't have any time to look at doing this myself but I expect it would be worthwhile thing to do if someone wanted to pick this up.

 

-Greg

 

 

On 23 September 2015 at 22:48, Hal Finkel via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > wrote:

Hi Sumanth,

I don't know to what you're referring, but the output from Release vs. Release+Asserts should be identical. There might be differences in the IR value names, but if that is affecting the final result, that's a bug.

 -Hal


----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sumanth Gundapaneni via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >
> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> , llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 4:44:05 PM
> Subject: [llvm-dev] Codegen difference between Asserts and No-Asserts mode
>
> Hi,
>
> What is the guarantee that the codegen is same across Release and
> Release+Asserts build (except the known differences)?
>
> I assume there is no guarantee and it is possible to drop a bug like
> this. Personally I feel it is very expensive to debug and it depends
> on each scenario.
>
> Most of the bots test the Release+Asserts mode and any thoughts on
> how we can catch this sort of a problem with minimal set of changes
> to build infrastructure?
>
> --Sumanth G
>
>
>
>

> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> 
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>

--
Hal Finkel
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> 
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150929/5e2da75b/attachment.html>