Hi Nico Now that r262420 is landed. Is there any plan to move CUDA to the new approach so we can fix the UNIX conformance test?
Thanks Steven > On Apr 22, 2017, at 8:08 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits > <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via cfe-commits > <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > [Some necromancy here...] > > This commit effectively reverted r173361 and r173825, breaking UNIX > conformance for our c99 wrapper. > > See: > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/c99.html > <http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/c99.html> >> When c99 encounters a compilation error that causes an object file not to be >> created, it shall write a diagnostic to standard error and continue to >> compile other source code operands, but it shall not perform the link phase >> and it shall return a non-zero exit status. > > > We had a test, but this commit changed that as well (I suppose it could have > been better documented). > > How easily could this be restricted to only affect CUDA jobs? > > If this gets reverted, the clang-cl PCH code needs to use the approach in > https://reviews.llvm.org/D17695 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D17695> before I > rebased that patch over this revision here, so that a PCH compilation failure > stops the compilation of the main TU. > > >> On Feb 24, 2016, at 13:49, Justin Lebar via cfe-commits >> <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Author: jlebar >> Date: Wed Feb 24 15:49:28 2016 >> New Revision: 261774 >> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=261774&view=rev >> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=261774&view=rev> >> Log: >> Bail on compilation as soon as a job fails. >> >> Summary: >> (Re-land of r260448, which was reverted in r260522 due to a test failure >> in Driver/output-file-cleanup.c that only showed up in fresh builds.) >> >> Previously we attempted to be smart; if one job failed, we'd run all >> jobs that didn't depend on the failing job. >> >> Problem is, this doesn't work well for e.g. CUDA compilation without >> -save-temps. In this case, the device-side and host-side Assemble >> actions (which actually are responsible for preprocess, compile, >> backend, and assemble, since we're not saving temps) are necessarily >> distinct. So our clever heuristic doesn't help us, and we repeat every >> error message once for host and once for each device arch. >> >> The main effect of this change, other than fixing CUDA, is that if you >> pass multiple cc files to one instance of clang and you get a compile >> error, we'll stop when the first cc1 job fails. >> >> Reviewers: echristo >> >> Subscribers: cfe-commits, jhen, echristo, tra, rafael >> >> Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17217 >> <http://reviews.llvm.org/D17217> >> >> Modified: >> cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp >> cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c >> >> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp >> URL: >> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff >> >> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff> >> ============================================================================== >> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp (original) >> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Compilation.cpp Wed Feb 24 15:49:28 2016 >> @@ -163,39 +163,17 @@ int Compilation::ExecuteCommand(const Co >> return ExecutionFailed ? 1 : Res; >> } >> >> -typedef SmallVectorImpl< std::pair<int, const Command *> > >> FailingCommandList; >> - >> -static bool ActionFailed(const Action *A, >> - const FailingCommandList &FailingCommands) { >> - >> - if (FailingCommands.empty()) >> - return false; >> - >> - for (FailingCommandList::const_iterator CI = FailingCommands.begin(), >> - CE = FailingCommands.end(); CI != CE; ++CI) >> - if (A == &(CI->second->getSource())) >> - return true; >> - >> - for (const Action *AI : A->inputs()) >> - if (ActionFailed(AI, FailingCommands)) >> - return true; >> - >> - return false; >> -} >> - >> -static bool InputsOk(const Command &C, >> - const FailingCommandList &FailingCommands) { >> - return !ActionFailed(&C.getSource(), FailingCommands); >> -} >> - >> -void Compilation::ExecuteJobs(const JobList &Jobs, >> - FailingCommandList &FailingCommands) const { >> +void Compilation::ExecuteJobs( >> + const JobList &Jobs, >> + SmallVectorImpl<std::pair<int, const Command *>> &FailingCommands) >> const { >> for (const auto &Job : Jobs) { >> - if (!InputsOk(Job, FailingCommands)) >> - continue; >> const Command *FailingCommand = nullptr; >> - if (int Res = ExecuteCommand(Job, FailingCommand)) >> + if (int Res = ExecuteCommand(Job, FailingCommand)) { >> FailingCommands.push_back(std::make_pair(Res, FailingCommand)); >> + // Bail as soon as one command fails, so we don't output duplicate >> error >> + // messages if we die on e.g. the same file. >> + return; >> + } >> } >> } >> >> >> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c >> URL: >> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff >> >> <http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c?rev=261774&r1=261773&r2=261774&view=diff> >> ============================================================================== >> --- cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c (original) >> +++ cfe/trunk/test/Driver/output-file-cleanup.c Wed Feb 24 15:49:28 2016 >> @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@ invalid C code >> // RUN: test -f %t1.s >> // RUN: test ! -f %t2.s >> >> +// When given multiple .c files to compile, clang compiles them in order >> until >> +// it hits an error, at which point it stops. >> +// >> // RUN: touch %t1.c >> // RUN: echo "invalid C code" > %t2.c >> // RUN: touch %t3.c >> @@ -46,6 +49,6 @@ invalid C code >> // RUN: cd %T && not %clang -S %t1.c %t2.c %t3.c %t4.c %t5.c >> // RUN: test -f %t1.s >> // RUN: test ! -f %t2.s >> -// RUN: test -f %t3.s >> +// RUN: test ! -f %t3.s >> // RUN: test ! -f %t4.s >> -// RUN: test -f %t5.s >> +// RUN: test ! -f %t5.s >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-commits mailing list >> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >> <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits> > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits> > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
