Menu
▾
▴
Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Current Status?
|
From: Sherard D. <sc...@gm...> - 2012-01-04 04:06:06
|
John, I've looked into writing more test cases. It seems that the LLVM regression testing system is incredibly easy to use, and I've already mocked up a few tests with it. Are there any specific things I should have in mind when writing tests? Will soon take a look at bringing the patches up to date with the LLVM trunk. (I assume we're talking about those in the svn /llvm/trunk/patches/) As for DragonEgg, not sure I understand it. From what basic research I did on it, I didn't find a whole lot of documentation but from what I gathered so far I'm not sure I see the benefits. The most obvious benefit I could see was to leverage GCC's existing AVR support instead of patching clang. However to me that just seems like shifting effort from one place to another (clang to DragonEgg) to get (essentially) the same result. That idea aside, as far as I'm aware, clang already tries to be very compatible with GCC. Additionally Windows does not seem to be on that list of "successfully used on" platforms for DragonEgg, and I might be wrong about this, but I thought Windows was the most common development platform for the AVR? What is it that I'm missing here? Thanks, -----Original Message----- From: John Myers <ato...@gm...> To: Sherard Dames <sc...@gm...> Cc: avr...@li... Subject: Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Current Status? Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 23:46:08 -0800 Hi Sherard, Borja was working on a re-write of the llvm code. What's in llvm trunk now has a lot of bit-rot so spending too much time on it before the new code is committed would be a waste. Borja's mentioned we need more test cases to spot regressions. We have some test cases but they're not organized or in the format that the LLVM tools use. So one helpful thing would be to create/document/organize test cases and then also make them work with the LLVM regression test system. There's also plenty of work for the Clang and Dragonegg front ends. Dragonegg [http://dragonegg.llvm.org/] is the gcc front end. There will probable be a lot of people who will prefer to tryout LLVM through the more gradual transition via Dragonegg. I've added some skeleton files but basically nothing been done with Dragonegg. So creating an AVR-Dragonegg port is needed. Building/testing an avr-gcc version that works with plugins (aka Dragonegg) also needs to be done. I believe avr-gcc needs to be compiled to support LTO and plugins. Getting the avr patches to apply cleanly to the current LLVM trunk probable is needed also. This should be simple task. Thanks, John On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Sherard Dames <sc...@gm...> wrote: Hi Eric, I am interested in an AVR backend for LLVM, so naturally I stumbled across this project. So I suppose my interest would be contribution as I have quite a bit of time on my hands, and would like to see it happen. I have been hacking away to get my hands dirty with LLVM, as I am unfamiliar with it. Ultimately I was hoping to contribute to a pre-existing effort, and I would like to get started here. I would appreciate some guidance as to some goals that I could begin helping around with, as I'm not sure about the status of the code in the SVN repository (or what's "safe" to work on). I'm very interested in getting this project moving a bit more. Thanks, On Thu, 2011-12-29 at 22:28 -0700, Weddington, Eric wrote: > Hi Sherard, > > No, it's not a dead project. However, it is a slow-moving project. :-) > > There are some behind-the-scenes work going on by a couple of the > developers. But this does not mean "behind close doors". It's usually > sporadic work that is going on, that is not yet committed, usually due > to developer time constraints. > > If I may ask, what is your interest in the project? > > Thanks, > Eric Weddington > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sherard Dames [mailto:sc...@gm...] > > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 12:14 PM > > To: avr...@li... > > Subject: [avr-llvm-devel] Current Status? > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I'm curious as to the current status of this project. From the looks > of > > the SVN (and the mailing list) it would appear that the project is > > fairly inactive. Is it simply that work is going on behind closed > doors? > > Or perhaps, is it a dead project? > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- > > ---- > > Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a > complex > > infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access > to > > virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual > > desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI > infrastructure > > costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox > > _______________________________________________ > > avr-llvm-devel mailing list > > avr...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox _______________________________________________ avr-llvm-devel mailing list avr...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/avr-llvm-devel |
