> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Stellard [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 03 December 2014 16:25 > To: Daniel Sanders; Stellard, Thomas; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Deleted Mips symbols in the 3.5 branch > > On 12/03/2014 05:11 AM, Daniel Sanders wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Tom Stellard [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: 03 December 2014 02:16 > >> To: Daniel Sanders; Stellard, Thomas; [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: Deleted Mips symbols in the 3.5 branch > >> > >> On 12/02/2014 05:54 PM, Daniel Sanders wrote: > >>> I could be completely off-track here, but my initial attempts at using > >>> abi- > >> compliance-checker on a subset of the public headers (everything in > >> $prefix/include/llvm/Target, and > >> $prefix/include/llvm/ExecutionEngine/ExecutionEngine.h) haven't > reported > >> anything other than --prefix related differences and this got me thinking. > >>> > >>> We only need to worry about symbols that the user can directly access > >> from the definitions in the public (installed) headers and not the whole > >> symbol table, don't we? These symbols are in the symbol table for the > >> shared library, but as far as I can tell there is no definition in the > >> public > >> headers that could enable a user to directly reference anything from > >> $srcdir/lib/Target/Mips (not even the create* functions). > >>> > >> > >> This is a good point, and I think you are right about this. I have been > >> using the ABI checker with -objects-only so it wasn't considering the > >> headers at all. I think we are probably OK then with these deleted > symbols > >> for now, thanks for looking into this and sorry you had to be the guinea > pig. > >> > > > > No problem. I need to learn quite a lot of the implementation detail for C++ > anyway and this has been very helpful for that. > > > > Hi Daniel, > > It took one hour and 8 GBs of memory, but I got the ABI checker working > with headers. > It looks like there is one patch that breaks the ABI: r223018 In > include/llvm/CodeGen/CallingConvLower, this commits adds new members > to the middle of > enum LocInfo, which changes the values of some existing members. The > new members should > be added to the end. Would you be able to fix this? > > Thanks, > Tom
Fixed in r223242. _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
