Menu
▾
▴
avr-llvm-devel — Developers mailing list.
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(26) |
Dec
(15) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(14) |
Oct
(16) |
Nov
(36) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(17) |
May
(9) |
Jun
(6) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(4) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(22) |
Feb
(12) |
Mar
(39) |
Apr
(31) |
May
(42) |
Jun
(35) |
Jul
(32) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(5) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(9) |
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
(121) |
Jul
(61) |
Aug
(7) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(6) |
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
| 2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2015 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-13 11:59:50
|
Nice Stepan, I will review your patch later on. You should be given commit access to this svn repo until we finally decide where to move on all of the code. 2013/6/13 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na...> > Hi all, > I'll use this reference for implementation, right? > > http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/avr-libc/avr-libc-user-manual-1.8.0.pdf.bz2 > > -Stepan. > > Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote: > > Ops. Forget to apply patch itself... > > > > -Stepan. > > > > Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote: > >> Hi all. That's a Thursday patch with inline asm. Currently the only > >> constraint is supported: register ('r'). > >> > >> -Stepan. > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > >> > >> Build for Windows Store. > >> > >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > >> _______________________________________________ > >> avr-llvm-devel mailing list > >> avr...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > >> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > > > Build for Windows Store. > > > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > > avr...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-13 09:00:58
|
Hi all, I'll use this reference for implementation, right? http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/avr-libc/avr-libc-user-manual-1.8.0.pdf.bz2 -Stepan. Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote: > Ops. Forget to apply patch itself... > > -Stepan. > > Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote: >> Hi all. That's a Thursday patch with inline asm. Currently the only >> constraint is supported: register ('r'). >> >> -Stepan. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: >> >> Build for Windows Store. >> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev >> _______________________________________________ >> avr-llvm-devel mailing list >> avr...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-13 08:37:35
|
Ops. Forget to apply patch itself...
-Stepan.
Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote:
> Hi all. That's a Thursday patch with inline asm. Currently the only
> constraint is supported: register ('r').
>
> -Stepan.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>
> Build for Windows Store.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> avr-llvm-devel mailing list
> avr...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel
>
|
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-13 08:33:42
|
Hi all. That's a Thursday patch with inline asm. Currently the only
constraint is supported: register ('r').
-Stepan.
|
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-12 17:30:53
|
Yes I will reply there. 2013/6/12 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...> > Hi All, > > See below. > > What do you guys say about the status of the port, per the question at > bottom? > > Borja, you probably know the best. > > Eric > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Anitha B Gollamudi [mailto:ani...@gm...] > > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:18 AM > > To: Weddington, Eric > > Cc: ll...@cs... > > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] AVR back end > > > > On 11 June 2013 00:32, Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > For quite some time there's been a side project for developing an AVR > > back > > > end for LLVM: > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/avr-llvm/ > > > > > > > Eric, > > > > Interesting. I tried few non-trivial programs on linux. They got > > compiled :-) > > > > I would say this is the right time to get the target to ToT. Ofcourse > > compiling at -O0 looks like a problem. > > > > While I understand that it is still a pre-alpha version as noted on > > website, can you roughly outline the level of backend (llc) support? > > (for e.g, basic/OK/pretty much all ISA support, target specific > > optimizations - none/few/many) > > > > > > -Anitha > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > |
|
From: Weddington, E. <Eri...@at...> - 2013-06-12 14:09:21
|
Hi All, See below. What do you guys say about the status of the port, per the question at bottom? Borja, you probably know the best. Eric > -----Original Message----- > From: Anitha B Gollamudi [mailto:ani...@gm...] > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:18 AM > To: Weddington, Eric > Cc: ll...@cs... > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] AVR back end > > On 11 June 2013 00:32, Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...> > wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > For quite some time there's been a side project for developing an AVR > back > > end for LLVM: > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/avr-llvm/ > > > > Eric, > > Interesting. I tried few non-trivial programs on linux. They got > compiled :-) > > I would say this is the right time to get the target to ToT. Ofcourse > compiling at -O0 looks like a problem. > > While I understand that it is still a pre-alpha version as noted on > website, can you roughly outline the level of backend (llc) support? > (for e.g, basic/OK/pretty much all ISA support, target specific > optimizations - none/few/many) > > > -Anitha |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-11 16:03:35
|
Hello John,
As I mentioned before, my sync was not very successful. *All* AVR tests
had been crashed.
So, currently I'm working with what-you-have code: r172075(LLVM) + r247
(avr-llvm).
I've implemented very draft version of inline assembly. If you still
want to use SVN I'll create you .diff tomorrow then. Though you can get
it today via GIT.
Today I did two things:
1. Implemented very draft inline assembler support.
2. Ported your svn repo (with whole history) to git and published it on
github (though, you can move it to any place):
2.1. Initially I've just cloned everything from svn to git. I got the
whole your history with the only branch. SVN branches are just a subfolders.
2.2. I've moved AVR folder to repo's root. And removed cfe and dragonegg
code (it should be tracked with another repo).
2.3. I've cloned llvm.git, checked out r172075, and attached our project
as lib/Target/AVR sub-folder.
Finally I got two branches of code:
>--- llvm commits are ---------------->[r172075]-----llvm-commits---->
\
- avr branch --->
/
>-- avr llvm commits --------[r247]
Currently I've published it on github. But, of course, you can clone it
and move to any place you want.
This command:
"git clone -b avr git://github.com/kaomoneus/avr-llvm.git"
clones all the llvm code, with AVR target inside (with draft inline asm
support ;-) ).
Currently it is merged only with r172075. I'll try to merge it with llvm
ToT tomorrow.
I'll online till 13:00 UTC-7, so any questions are welcome.
-Stepan.
John Myers wrote:
> Hi Stepan,
>
> Can you make a new unified diff based on the current repo?
> I'm still not able to get some of your patches to apply cleanly.
>
> P.S.
> I can give you write access to the repo if you want. Just let me know
> your sourceforge username.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na...
> <mailto:stp...@na...>> wrote:
>
> Gotcha :-) All tests has been passed :-)
> -Stepan.
>
> Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote:
> > And you thanks :-)
> > Will compile it again. Today I did some survey how InlineAsm class is
> > working, how it expanded in back-end. Though I couldn't start to
> > implement it in AVR. So, I hope will start to do it today :-)
> >
> > -Stepan.
> > Borja Ferrer wrote:
> >> Thanks for the link Stepan, I'll take a look.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na...
> <mailto:stp...@na...> <mailto:stp...@na...
> <mailto:stp...@na...>>>
> >>
> >> Hello Borja,
> >> Git allows you to clone LLVM project (it has GIT mirror), and
> >> develop your backend in your own branch. You will *never* lose
> >> commits under git, since it is distributed VCS and everyone
> keeps
> >> clone of all project history.
> >> There is good one-day git tutorial:
> >> http://git-scm.com/__documentation
> <http://git-scm.com/documentation>
> >>
> >> -Stepan.
> >>
> >> Borja Ferrer wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok then, guys that have used GIT before please discuss any
> >> advantages
> >> here. As i said, i havent used GIT before so i can't
> add any
> >> valuable
> >> points. I've been able to work with SVN and LLVM quite
> well so
> >> far though.
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...
> <mailto:Eri...@at...>
> >> <mailto:Eri...@at...
> <mailto:Eri...@at...>>
> >> <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.
> <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.>__com
> >> <mailto:Eri...@at...
> <mailto:Eri...@at...>>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Borja Ferrer
> [mailto:bor...@gm... <mailto:bor...@gm...>
> >> <mailto:bor...@gm...
> <mailto:bor...@gm...>>
> >> <mailto:bor...@gm...
> <mailto:bor...@gm...>
> >> <mailto:bor...@gm...
> <mailto:bor...@gm...>>>__]
> >> > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:33 AM
> >> > To: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; Weddington, Eric
> >> > Cc: avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourceforge.net
> <http://sourceforge.net>
> >> <mailto:avr...@li...
> <mailto:avr...@li...>>
> >> <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists.
> <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists.>__sourceforge.net <http://sourceforge.net>
> >> <mailto:avr...@li...
> <mailto:avr...@li...>>>
> >> > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Fwd: Sync with trunk
> >> >
> >> > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes
> in LLVM are
> >> automatically
> >> > merged in your local repo when you update, and
> when we
> >> need to update
> >> > our code base to fix interface changes we have
> to do it
> >> manually but
> >> > that's the only way I know of.
> >>
> >> All I'm trying to figure out is what would be the
> best VCS
> >> for us to
> >> use (svn or git) in moving over to Atmel Spaces.
> If using
> >> one over
> >> the other makes it easier to do some tasks (like
> staying in
> >> sync
> >> with llvm trunk), then we should go with the one
> that makes
> >> it easier.
> >>
> >> If it doesn't really matter, then I suggest just
> sticking
> >> with svn.
> >>
> >> Eric
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
> >
> > Build for Windows Store.
> >
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > avr-llvm-devel mailing list
> > avr...@li...
> <mailto:avr...@li...>
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>
> Build for Windows Store.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> avr-llvm-devel mailing list
> avr...@li...
> <mailto:avr...@li...>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel
>
>
|
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 20:31:55
|
Oh that was fast! I will take a read about the dev policy later. 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...> > Here's one response... > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eli Friedman [mailto:eli...@gm...] > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 1:45 PM > > To: Weddington, Eric > > Cc: ll...@cs... > > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] AVR back end > > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Weddington, Eric > > <Eri...@at...> wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > For quite some time there's been a side project for developing an > > AVR back end for LLVM: > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/avr-llvm/ > > > > What is required from us to be able to add this work to the LLVM > > repo? > > > > > > > > http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html is the general developer docs > > (see in particular "Making a major change" and "incremental > > development"); the only thing that's really specific to backends is > > that each backend has to have an active LLVM developer who owns it. > > > > > > And when do you think would be a good time for us to do that? > > > > > > As soon as possible. (Even if it isn't ready, sending in patches which > > can get reviewed as soon as possible is important; the review process > > can take a while for a major change.) > > > > -Eli > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > |
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 20:31:17
|
2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...> > Then they'll need to be put in a shape that can be accepted. :-) > > That's going to be the biggest issue, some of them are very specific and will require changing several LLVM interfaces. |
|
From: Weddington, E. <Eri...@at...> - 2013-06-10 19:56:27
|
Here's one response... > -----Original Message----- > From: Eli Friedman [mailto:eli...@gm...] > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 1:45 PM > To: Weddington, Eric > Cc: ll...@cs... > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] AVR back end > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Weddington, Eric > <Eri...@at...> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > For quite some time there's been a side project for developing an > AVR back end for LLVM: > http://sourceforge.net/projects/avr-llvm/ > > What is required from us to be able to add this work to the LLVM > repo? > > > > http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html is the general developer docs > (see in particular "Making a major change" and "incremental > development"); the only thing that's really specific to backends is > that each backend has to have an active LLVM developer who owns it. > > > And when do you think would be a good time for us to do that? > > > As soon as possible. (Even if it isn't ready, sending in patches which > can get reviewed as soon as possible is important; the review process > can take a while for a major change.) > > -Eli |
|
From: <sch...@kw...> - 2013-06-10 19:46:37
|
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21:12:58 +0200, Borja Ferrer wrote > Adding a backend to LLVM is not an easy thing to do, there was a discussion > in the llvm mailing list some time ago about merging experimental > backends, and even the devs didnt seem to agree too much. They don't > like mantaining backends each time a modification has to be done. I > think they proposed to have new backends in some experimental branch > and if after some time they got positive feedback they would be > finally merged to trunk. Yes, that thread starts here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2012-July/051929.html The most recent discussions about adding specific new backends are: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-March/060015.html http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-March/060508.html http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2013-April/061170.html (I think...) -- Kevin Schoedel <sch...@kw...> VA3TCS |
|
From: Weddington, E. <Eri...@at...> - 2013-06-10 19:21:26
|
> -----Original Message----- > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm...] > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 1:13 PM > To: Weddington, Eric > Cc: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; John Myers; avr-llvm > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] May be join to LLVM? > > Adding a backend to LLVM is not an easy thing to do, there was a > discussion in the llvm mailing list some time ago about merging > experimental backends, and even the devs didnt seem to agree too much. > They don't like mantaining backends each time a modification has to be > done. I think they proposed to have new backends in some experimental > branch and if after some time they got positive feedback they would be > finally merged to trunk. I just asked on the main llvm-dev mailing list. Let's see what kind of response we'll get. Merging with llvm does mean that the AVR backend will have to be regularly maintained. That's fairly standard even on GCC; no one there will continue to maintain the AVR port. It's up to the port maintainers. > The biggest problem I see now is that we would have to merge our out of > tree patches, some of them are very hacky and i know they're not going > to like them. Then they'll need to be put in a shape that can be accepted. :-) |
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 19:14:25
|
Great Stepan! Yes John, patches are a real pain, my question is: would git simplify managing them compared to svn? 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na...> > Gotcha :-) All tests has been passed :-) > -Stepan. > > Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote: > >> And you thanks :-) >> Will compile it again. Today I did some survey how InlineAsm class is >> working, how it expanded in back-end. Though I couldn't start to >> implement it in AVR. So, I hope will start to do it today :-) >> >> -Stepan. >> Borja Ferrer wrote: >> >>> Thanks for the link Stepan, I'll take a look. >>> >>> >>> 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na... <mailto: >>> stp...@na...>> >>> >>> Hello Borja, >>> Git allows you to clone LLVM project (it has GIT mirror), and >>> develop your backend in your own branch. You will *never* lose >>> commits under git, since it is distributed VCS and everyone keeps >>> clone of all project history. >>> There is good one-day git tutorial: >>> http://git-scm.com/__**documentation<http://git-scm.com/__documentation>< >>> http://git-scm.com/**documentation <http://git-scm.com/documentation>> >>> >>> -Stepan. >>> >>> Borja Ferrer wrote: >>> >>> Ok then, guys that have used GIT before please discuss any >>> advantages >>> here. As i said, i havent used GIT before so i can't add any >>> valuable >>> points. I've been able to work with SVN and LLVM quite well so >>> far though. >>> >>> >>> 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at... >>> <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.**com <Eri...@at...> >>> > >>> <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.**__com >>> <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.**com <Eri...@at...> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm... >>> <mailto:bor...@gm...> >>> <mailto:bor...@gm... >>> <mailto:bor...@gm...>**>__] >>> > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:33 AM >>> > To: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; Weddington, Eric >>> > Cc: avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourcef**orge.net<http://sourceforge.net> >>> <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists.**sourceforge.net<avr...@li...> >>> > >>> <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists._**_sourceforge.net >>> <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists.**sourceforge.net<avr...@li...> >>> >> >>> > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Fwd: Sync with trunk >>> > >>> > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM >>> are >>> automatically >>> > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we >>> need to update >>> > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it >>> manually but >>> > that's the only way I know of. >>> >>> All I'm trying to figure out is what would be the best VCS >>> for us to >>> use (svn or git) in moving over to Atmel Spaces. If using >>> one over >>> the other makes it easier to do some tasks (like staying in >>> sync >>> with llvm trunk), then we should go with the one that makes >>> it easier. >>> >>> If it doesn't really matter, then I suggest just sticking >>> with svn. >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >> ------------------ >> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: >> >> Build for Windows Store. >> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-**dev2dev<http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> avr-llvm-devel mailing list >> avr-llvm-devel@lists.**sourceforge.net<avr...@li...> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/**lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel> >> >> > |
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 19:13:05
|
Adding a backend to LLVM is not an easy thing to do, there was a discussion in the llvm mailing list some time ago about merging experimental backends, and even the devs didnt seem to agree too much. They don't like mantaining backends each time a modification has to be done. I think they proposed to have new backends in some experimental branch and if after some time they got positive feedback they would be finally merged to trunk. The biggest problem I see now is that we would have to merge our out of tree patches, some of them are very hacky and i know they're not going to like them. 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...> > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stepan Dyatkovskiy [mailto:stp...@na...] > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 12:03 PM > > To: John Myers; Borja Ferrer; avr-llvm > > Subject: [avr-llvm-devel] May be join to LLVM? > > > > Guys, > > > > I propose to make your back-end stable and join to LLVM project then. > > Yes, just add your back-end to LLVM. There are few advantages: > > 1. You won't synchronize it anymore. If somebody will brake AVR > > backend, > > then, according to LLVM policy: it *his* blame, and he will fix it, not > > you and me. You will get some kind of protection. > > 2. Being in main llvm repo, AVR backend will attract more developers > > and > > testers, more people that may be interested in your code. > > 3. You lose nothing in that case. Benefits only. > > 4. You will still code owners, of course. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Well the thought was crossing my mind this morning... > > The only reason to have a separate project was to develop the AVR backend > sufficiently enough that it worked. The intent, if I recall, was always to > merge with LLVM at some point (to be determined). Are we at that point now > that it will benefit us to merge with LLVM? > > Eric > |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-10 18:33:57
|
Gotcha :-) All tests has been passed :-) -Stepan. Stepan Dyatkovskiy wrote: > And you thanks :-) > Will compile it again. Today I did some survey how InlineAsm class is > working, how it expanded in back-end. Though I couldn't start to > implement it in AVR. So, I hope will start to do it today :-) > > -Stepan. > Borja Ferrer wrote: >> Thanks for the link Stepan, I'll take a look. >> >> >> 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na... <mailto:stp...@na...>> >> >> Hello Borja, >> Git allows you to clone LLVM project (it has GIT mirror), and >> develop your backend in your own branch. You will *never* lose >> commits under git, since it is distributed VCS and everyone keeps >> clone of all project history. >> There is good one-day git tutorial: >> http://git-scm.com/__documentation <http://git-scm.com/documentation> >> >> -Stepan. >> >> Borja Ferrer wrote: >> >> Ok then, guys that have used GIT before please discuss any >> advantages >> here. As i said, i havent used GIT before so i can't add any >> valuable >> points. I've been able to work with SVN and LLVM quite well so >> far though. >> >> >> 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at... >> <mailto:Eri...@at...> >> <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.__com >> <mailto:Eri...@at...>>> >> >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm... >> <mailto:bor...@gm...> >> <mailto:bor...@gm... >> <mailto:bor...@gm...>>__] >> > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:33 AM >> > To: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; Weddington, Eric >> > Cc: avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourceforge.net >> <mailto:avr...@li...> >> <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourceforge.net >> <mailto:avr...@li...>> >> > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Fwd: Sync with trunk >> > >> > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM are >> automatically >> > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we >> need to update >> > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it >> manually but >> > that's the only way I know of. >> >> All I'm trying to figure out is what would be the best VCS >> for us to >> use (svn or git) in moving over to Atmel Spaces. If using >> one over >> the other makes it easier to do some tasks (like staying in >> sync >> with llvm trunk), then we should go with the one that makes >> it easier. >> >> If it doesn't really matter, then I suggest just sticking >> with svn. >> >> Eric >> >> >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > |
|
From: John M. <ato...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 18:27:39
|
Like Stepan has said, maintaining the patches with SVN on an out-of-tree project often causes issues. If we just had one big monolithic patch then it wouldn't be an issue. I suspect doing major work on parts of LLVM outside of *lib/target/AVR *will also cause similar maintainability issues uses SVN. On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na...>wrote: > Hi Borja, > I think John means all this stuff with .diff files that lies under svn. > > I've tried several mid-January revisions with r247. But I couldn't get > compilable version. Would you tell me please what "svn info" says in > your llvm project? > > All AVR tests has been failed after my own sync (r244). Seems I've > missed something. > > -Stepan. > > Borja Ferrer wrote: > > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM are automatically > > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we need to update > > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it manually but > > that's the only way I know of. > > > > Stepan: the old sourceforge repo > > (http://avr-llvm.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/avr-llvm/) should work with > > the LLVM trunk version of that time (mid january). I have to update our > > code to latest LLVM trunk so we can compile the backend with their > > newest code. What tests are failing for you? IIRC i only got failures > > with tests not related with our backend. And another thing, are you > > working on adding inline asm support? > > > > > > 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na... <mailto: > stp...@na...>> > > > > Guys, my sync + r244 gave me AVR test failures. Do you have > > somewhere repo with actual things (even with old llvm) ? > > -Stepan > > > > Borja Ferrer wrote: > > > > Wow the SF migration has messed my last 5 commits, John I just > > noticed > > that you merged some of them into the new repo but some are > > still missing. > > > > Regarding the status since it has been asked, the most important > > thing > > to be done in the backend side is inline asm support, as John > > mentioned > > the backend should be able to compile now any feature except for > > this. > > The frontend needs some more work, basically getting a working > > toolchain > > done. > > > > About the version control in atmel spaces, I'm only familiar > > with CVS > > and SVN, never worked before with git and mercurial. > > > > > > > ------------------------------__------------------------------__------------------ > > How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments: > > 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and > operations > > 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services > > 3. A single system of record for all IT processes > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/__servicenow-d2d-j > > <http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j> > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________ > > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > > avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourceforge.net > > <mailto:avr...@li...> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/__lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > > <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel> > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > |
|
From: Weddington, E. <Eri...@at...> - 2013-06-10 18:13:57
|
> -----Original Message----- > From: Stepan Dyatkovskiy [mailto:stp...@na...] > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 12:03 PM > To: John Myers; Borja Ferrer; avr-llvm > Subject: [avr-llvm-devel] May be join to LLVM? > > Guys, > > I propose to make your back-end stable and join to LLVM project then. > Yes, just add your back-end to LLVM. There are few advantages: > 1. You won't synchronize it anymore. If somebody will brake AVR > backend, > then, according to LLVM policy: it *his* blame, and he will fix it, not > you and me. You will get some kind of protection. > 2. Being in main llvm repo, AVR backend will attract more developers > and > testers, more people that may be interested in your code. > 3. You lose nothing in that case. Benefits only. > 4. You will still code owners, of course. > > What do you think? > Well the thought was crossing my mind this morning... The only reason to have a separate project was to develop the AVR backend sufficiently enough that it worked. The intent, if I recall, was always to merge with LLVM at some point (to be determined). Are we at that point now that it will benefit us to merge with LLVM? Eric |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-10 18:07:00
|
And you thanks :-) Will compile it again. Today I did some survey how InlineAsm class is working, how it expanded in back-end. Though I couldn't start to implement it in AVR. So, I hope will start to do it today :-) -Stepan. Borja Ferrer wrote: > Thanks for the link Stepan, I'll take a look. > > > 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na... <mailto:stp...@na...>> > > Hello Borja, > Git allows you to clone LLVM project (it has GIT mirror), and > develop your backend in your own branch. You will *never* lose > commits under git, since it is distributed VCS and everyone keeps > clone of all project history. > There is good one-day git tutorial: > http://git-scm.com/__documentation <http://git-scm.com/documentation> > > -Stepan. > > Borja Ferrer wrote: > > Ok then, guys that have used GIT before please discuss any > advantages > here. As i said, i havent used GIT before so i can't add any > valuable > points. I've been able to work with SVN and LLVM quite well so > far though. > > > 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at... > <mailto:Eri...@at...> > <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.__com > <mailto:Eri...@at...>>> > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm... > <mailto:bor...@gm...> > <mailto:bor...@gm... > <mailto:bor...@gm...>>__] > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:33 AM > > To: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; Weddington, Eric > > Cc: avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourceforge.net > <mailto:avr...@li...> > <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourceforge.net > <mailto:avr...@li...>> > > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Fwd: Sync with trunk > > > > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM are > automatically > > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we > need to update > > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it > manually but > > that's the only way I know of. > > All I'm trying to figure out is what would be the best VCS > for us to > use (svn or git) in moving over to Atmel Spaces. If using > one over > the other makes it easier to do some tasks (like staying in > sync > with llvm trunk), then we should go with the one that makes > it easier. > > If it doesn't really matter, then I suggest just sticking > with svn. > > Eric > > > > |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-10 18:06:10
|
Hello Borja, Git allows you to clone LLVM project (it has GIT mirror), and develop your backend in your own branch. You will *never* lose commits under git, since it is distributed VCS and everyone keeps clone of all project history. There is good one-day git tutorial: http://git-scm.com/documentation -Stepan. Borja Ferrer wrote: > Ok then, guys that have used GIT before please discuss any advantages > here. As i said, i havent used GIT before so i can't add any valuable > points. I've been able to work with SVN and LLVM quite well so far though. > > > 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at... > <mailto:Eri...@at...>> > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm... > <mailto:bor...@gm...>] > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:33 AM > > To: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; Weddington, Eric > > Cc: avr...@li... > <mailto:avr...@li...> > > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Fwd: Sync with trunk > > > > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM are > automatically > > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we need to update > > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it manually but > > that's the only way I know of. > > All I'm trying to figure out is what would be the best VCS for us to > use (svn or git) in moving over to Atmel Spaces. If using one over > the other makes it easier to do some tasks (like staying in sync > with llvm trunk), then we should go with the one that makes it easier. > > If it doesn't really matter, then I suggest just sticking with svn. > > Eric > > |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-10 18:03:18
|
Guys, I propose to make your back-end stable and join to LLVM project then. Yes, just add your back-end to LLVM. There are few advantages: 1. You won't synchronize it anymore. If somebody will brake AVR backend, then, according to LLVM policy: it *his* blame, and he will fix it, not you and me. You will get some kind of protection. 2. Being in main llvm repo, AVR backend will attract more developers and testers, more people that may be interested in your code. 3. You lose nothing in that case. Benefits only. 4. You will still code owners, of course. What do you think? -Stepan. |
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 18:01:28
|
Thanks for the link Stepan, I'll take a look. 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na...> > Hello Borja, > Git allows you to clone LLVM project (it has GIT mirror), and develop your > backend in your own branch. You will *never* lose commits under git, since > it is distributed VCS and everyone keeps clone of all project history. > There is good one-day git tutorial: > http://git-scm.com/**documentation <http://git-scm.com/documentation> > > -Stepan. > > Borja Ferrer wrote: > >> Ok then, guys that have used GIT before please discuss any advantages >> here. As i said, i havent used GIT before so i can't add any valuable >> points. I've been able to work with SVN and LLVM quite well so far though. >> >> >> 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at... >> <mailto:Eric.Weddington@atmel.**com <Eri...@at...>>> >> >> >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm... >> <mailto:bor...@gm...>**] >> > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:33 AM >> > To: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; Weddington, Eric >> > Cc: avr-llvm-devel@lists.**sourceforge.net<avr...@li...> >> <mailto:avr-llvm-devel@lists.**sourceforge.net<avr...@li...> >> > >> > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Fwd: Sync with trunk >> > >> > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM are >> automatically >> > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we need to >> update >> > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it manually >> but >> > that's the only way I know of. >> >> All I'm trying to figure out is what would be the best VCS for us to >> use (svn or git) in moving over to Atmel Spaces. If using one over >> the other makes it easier to do some tasks (like staying in sync >> with llvm trunk), then we should go with the one that makes it easier. >> >> If it doesn't really matter, then I suggest just sticking with svn. >> >> Eric >> >> >> > |
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 17:59:10
|
Great, thanks John. Stepan, here it is: LLVM SVN info: Revisión: 172075 Autor del último cambio: tnorthover Fecha de último cambio: 2013-01-10 16:17:36 +0100 (jue 10 de ene de 2013) AVR-LLVM SVN info: Ruta: . Revisión: 247 Autor del último cambio: faluco Fecha de último cambio: 2013-01-12 00:36:55 +0100 (sáb 12 de ene de 2013) 2013/6/10 John Myers <ato...@gm...> > Borja, I still need to update the new repo with two more of your commits. > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:48 AM, Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...>wrote: > >> Wow the SF migration has messed my last 5 commits, John I just noticed >> that you merged some of them into the new repo but some are still missing. >> >> Regarding the status since it has been asked, the most important thing to >> be done in the backend side is inline asm support, as John mentioned the >> backend should be able to compile now any feature except for this. The >> frontend needs some more work, basically getting a working toolchain done. >> >> About the version control in atmel spaces, I'm only familiar with CVS and >> SVN, never worked before with git and mercurial. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments: >> 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations >> 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services >> 3. A single system of record for all IT processes >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j >> _______________________________________________ >> avr-llvm-devel mailing list >> avr...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel >> >> > |
|
From: John M. <ato...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 17:49:24
|
Borja, I still need to update the new repo with two more of your commits. On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:48 AM, Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...> wrote: > Wow the SF migration has messed my last 5 commits, John I just noticed > that you merged some of them into the new repo but some are still missing. > > Regarding the status since it has been asked, the most important thing to > be done in the backend side is inline asm support, as John mentioned the > backend should be able to compile now any feature except for this. The > frontend needs some more work, basically getting a working toolchain done. > > About the version control in atmel spaces, I'm only familiar with CVS and > SVN, never worked before with git and mercurial. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments: > 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations > 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services > 3. A single system of record for all IT processes > http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j > _______________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > > |
|
From: Stepan D. <stp...@na...> - 2013-06-10 17:46:47
|
Hi Borja, I think John means all this stuff with .diff files that lies under svn. I've tried several mid-January revisions with r247. But I couldn't get compilable version. Would you tell me please what "svn info" says in your llvm project? All AVR tests has been failed after my own sync (r244). Seems I've missed something. -Stepan. Borja Ferrer wrote: > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM are automatically > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we need to update > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it manually but > that's the only way I know of. > > Stepan: the old sourceforge repo > (http://avr-llvm.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/avr-llvm/) should work with > the LLVM trunk version of that time (mid january). I have to update our > code to latest LLVM trunk so we can compile the backend with their > newest code. What tests are failing for you? IIRC i only got failures > with tests not related with our backend. And another thing, are you > working on adding inline asm support? > > > 2013/6/10 Stepan Dyatkovskiy <stp...@na... <mailto:stp...@na...>> > > Guys, my sync + r244 gave me AVR test failures. Do you have > somewhere repo with actual things (even with old llvm) ? > -Stepan > > Borja Ferrer wrote: > > Wow the SF migration has messed my last 5 commits, John I just > noticed > that you merged some of them into the new repo but some are > still missing. > > Regarding the status since it has been asked, the most important > thing > to be done in the backend side is inline asm support, as John > mentioned > the backend should be able to compile now any feature except for > this. > The frontend needs some more work, basically getting a working > toolchain > done. > > About the version control in atmel spaces, I'm only familiar > with CVS > and SVN, never worked before with git and mercurial. > > > ------------------------------__------------------------------__------------------ > How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments: > 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations > 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services > 3. A single system of record for all IT processes > http://p.sf.net/sfu/__servicenow-d2d-j > <http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j> > > > > _________________________________________________ > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > avr-llvm-devel@lists.__sourceforge.net > <mailto:avr...@li...> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/__lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel > <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel> > > > |
|
From: Borja F. <bor...@gm...> - 2013-06-10 17:45:33
|
Ok then, guys that have used GIT before please discuss any advantages here. As i said, i havent used GIT before so i can't add any valuable points. I've been able to work with SVN and LLVM quite well so far though. 2013/6/10 Weddington, Eric <Eri...@at...> > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Borja Ferrer [mailto:bor...@gm...] > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:33 AM > > To: Stepan Dyatkovskiy; Weddington, Eric > > Cc: avr...@li... > > Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Fwd: Sync with trunk > > > > Eric, what do you exactly mean? Trunk changes in LLVM are automatically > > merged in your local repo when you update, and when we need to update > > our code base to fix interface changes we have to do it manually but > > that's the only way I know of. > > All I'm trying to figure out is what would be the best VCS for us to use > (svn or git) in moving over to Atmel Spaces. If using one over the other > makes it easier to do some tasks (like staying in sync with llvm trunk), > then we should go with the one that makes it easier. > > If it doesn't really matter, then I suggest just sticking with svn. > > Eric > |
14 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
