[llvm-dev] [RFC] RISC-V backend

[Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev]

On 18 August 2016 at 15:21, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 18 August 2016 at 14:32, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote:
>> Good question, I didn't mention buildbots in this RFC as from a quick
>> look at http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders it didn't look like
>> early-stage architecture ports tend to have one, and as you say
>> check-all should be be enough initially.
>
> They normally don't. But your target won't be tested by any other
> buildbot unless it's built by default, which only happens when it's
> made official.
>
> So, either you have some local validation (buildbot, weekly build +
> check-all, doesn't matter), with your target built in, or you won't
> know when your tests regress.

Obviously `./bin/llvm-lit -s -i ../test` is one of my most frequently
executed commands, but we definitely want automation to pick up issues
caused by changes elsewhere.

>> I'm sure that we (i.e.
>> lowRISC CIC) can support an additional buildbot when appropriate. Is
>> there any recommendation on minimum specification?
>
> If you have a server which can do some LLVM builds (can be any arch),
> then you just create a buildslave and add
> -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=RISCV to the CMake options, running check-all.
>
> This doesn't need to be public, but you don't want to find test
> failures only when we move your target to official, then it breaks
> *all* buildbots, etc.

Thanks, I didn't realise nobody was running a public buildbot already
that built all experimental archs - though of course that makes sense.
In that case I'll prioritise getting something set up.

Best,

Alex