[llvm-dev] Status of the New Pass Manager

[Leonard Chan via llvm-dev]

Update: Just landed the sancov port in rL365838. In regards to testing,
there's currently 5 failing unit tests with the new PM enabled. Once we
land fixes for those, we can switch unit tests to run with the new PM by
default.

On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 8:53 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> I don't exactly remember when I last tried it and I didn't realize
> there was r342896. I'll check it out. Thanks.
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 1:14 PM Philip Pfaffe <philip.pfaffe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Printing was implemented in r342896.
> > @Hiroshi: Are there specific issues or limitations you encountered with
> it?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Philip
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 8:48 PM Troy Johnson via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> -print-after-all is very useful for debugging and learning about LLVM.
> I would hope that would be implemented for the new PM before removing the
> old PM.  I'd personally consider it a blocker.
> >>
> >> -Troy
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Eric
> Christopher
> >> > via llvm-dev
> >> > Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 7:40 PM
> >> > To: Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com>
> >> > Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; Yi Kong <yikong at google.com>
> >> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Status of the New Pass Manager
> >> >
> >> > They don't, but this isn't considered a blocker to removing the old
> one as far as I
> >> > know.
> >> >
> >> > -eric
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 11:09 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi via llvm-dev <llvm-
> >> > dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > FWIW, the flags like -print-after, -printer-after-all don't work
> well
> >> > > with the new pass manager last time I checked.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 12:20 PM Stephen Hines via llvm-dev
> >> > > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The Android platform build (AOSP) has also switched to the new
> pass
> >> > manager recently. We do have a few bugs that we are chasing (hence
> opt-outs),
> >> > but it is working quite well otherwise.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Our current list of issues:
> >> > > > 1) Libsqlite still has a mysterious failure that we haven't been
> able to reduce
> >> > well.
> >> > > > 2) https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42124 shows that
> inlining costs
> >> > are a bit different under NPM. https://reviews.llvm.org/D63034 is
> one proposed
> >> > patch for addressing this.
> >> > > > 3) libpdfium exposed a non-determinism issue with NPM where
> having the
> >> > linux-libc-dev system package installed changes execution. We are
> still looking
> >> > at why this happens.
> >> > > > 4) Sanitizer coverage information isn't supported by the NPM yet
> >> > (https://reviews.llvm.org/D62888).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > Steve
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 11:07 AM Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev <llvm-
> >> > dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 at 17:46, Philip Reames via llvm-dev
> >> > > >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > For our downstream usage, we've switched entirely to the new
> pass
> >> > manager.  We made the switch a couple of months ago.  All of our
> testing is
> >> > being done with the NPM, and we're about to start deleting
> (downstream) code
> >> > which was only needed by the legacy pass manager.
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > I believe several other major contributors are in the same
> state.  We
> >> > really need to get upstream switched over so that all of the
> community's testing
> >> > efforts are aligned again.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> I hadn't realised it was so close to being ready. Do you see this
> >> > > >> as a switch that could be made before 9.0, or after it?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Best,
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Alex
> >> > > >> _______________________________________________
> >> > > >> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> > > >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> > > >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >> > > >
> >> > > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > > LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> > > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> > > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://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/20190711/2e7f7dcd/attachment.html>