Re: [ITA] llvm

On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 16:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
Jeremy Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2025, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 15 Jun 2025, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> >
> > > I pushed update to 20.1.7 and synced patches with upstream, current
> > > test results:
> > > llvm:
> > > Total Discovered Tests: 65227
> > >   Skipped          :    52 (0.08%)
> > >   Unsupported      :  2197 (3.37%)
> > >   Passed           : 62757 (96.21%)
> > >   Expectedly Failed:   193 (0.30%)
> > >   Failed           :    28 (0.04%)
> > >
> > > clang:
> > > Total Discovered Tests: 46308
> > >   Skipped          :     8 (0.02%)
> > >   Unsupported      :   181 (0.39%)
> > >   Passed           : 46069 (99.48%)
> > >   Expectedly Failed:    31 (0.07%)
> > >   Failed           :    19 (0.04%)
> > >
> > > lld:
> > > Total Discovered Tests: 1066
> > >   Unsupported:   10 (0.94%)
> > >   Passed     : 1056 (99.06%)
> 
> I went back to the "playground" branch (20.1.8), and backported more
> (mostly test) fixes.  I removed the clang patch to call the linker
> directly there, it was out of date, and probably makes more sense to
> continue to develop against 21.1.

The latest clang patch to call the linker directly cannot be applied
20.1.8 cleanly due to some changes in 21.1.

> Current test results for 20.1.8:
> 
> llvm:
> Total Discovered Tests: 65233
>   Skipped          :    55 (0.08%)
>   Unsupported      :  2200 (3.37%)
>   Passed           : 62769 (96.22%)
>   Expectedly Failed:   194 (0.30%)
>   Failed           :    15 (0.02%)
> 
> clang:
> Total Discovered Tests: 46308
>   Skipped          :     8 (0.02%)
>   Unsupported      :   192 (0.41%)
>   Passed           : 46068 (99.48%)
>   Expectedly Failed:    33 (0.07%)
>   Failed           :     7 (0.02%)

Great! Did you mark some tests as 'unsupported' for clang?

> Do you think it makes sense to deploy 20.1.8 to master soon and do at
> least a test release?

Yes I do! Will you do that?

-- 
Takashi Yano <[email protected]>