Track LLVM 15 changes.
Per https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html, support for non-opaque
pointers still exists and we can request that on our context. We have
until LLVM 16 to move to opaque pointers, a much larger change.
Back-patch to 11, where LLVM support arrived.
Author: Thomas Munro
Track LLVM 15 changes.
Per https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html, support for non-opaque
pointers still exists and we can request that on our context. We have
until LLVM 16 to move to opaque pointers, a much larger change.
Back-patch to 11, where LLVM support arrived.
Author: Thomas Munro
Track LLVM 15 changes.
Per https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html, support for non-opaque
pointers still exists and we can request that on our context. We have
until LLVM 16 to move to opaque pointers, a much larger change.
Back-patch to 11, where LLVM support arrived.
Author: Thomas Munro
Track LLVM 15 changes.
Per https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html, support for non-opaque
pointers still exists and we can request that on our context. We have
until LLVM 16 to move to opaque pointers, a much larger change.
Back-patch to 11, where LLVM support arrived.
Author: Thomas Munro
Track LLVM 15 changes.
Per https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html, support for non-opaque
pointers still exists and we can request that on our context. We have
until LLVM 16 to move to opaque pointers, a much larger change.
Back-patch to 11, where LLVM support arrived.
Author: Thomas Munro
Track LLVM 15 changes.
Per https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html, support for non-opaque
pointers still exists and we can request that on our context. We have
until LLVM 16 to move to opaque pointers, a much larger change.
Back-patch to 11, where LLVM support arrived.
Author: Thomas Munro
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 9:18 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 7:34 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> > Although seawasp isn't actually failing at the moment, it's emitting
> > a boatload of deprecation warnings, eg
> >
> > In file included from llvmjit_deform.c:27:
> > ../../../../src/include/
Hi,
On 2022-03-15 12:12:44 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Shortly I'll do the back-patch of LLVM 14 API changes (their final
> release tag is scheduled for tomorrow, as I've been reminded by
> package maintainers trying and failing to build).
+1
> But I figured I
> should also follow up on this b
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 11:44 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2022-02-16 09:18:53 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> >> Yeah I mentioned this problem in the other thread. I got as far as
> >> finding this write-up:
> >> https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html
>
> > Given that major
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-02-16 09:18:53 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> Yeah I mentioned this problem in the other thread. I got as far as
>> finding this write-up:
>> https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html
> Given that major parts of llvm (clang alone contains ~1k references) aren't
> y
Hi,
On 2022-02-16 09:18:53 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Yeah I mentioned this problem in the other thread. I got as far as
> finding this write-up:
>
> https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html
Given that major parts of llvm (clang alone contains ~1k references) aren't
yet transitioned, I wonde
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 7:34 AM Tom Lane wrote:
> Although seawasp isn't actually failing at the moment, it's emitting
> a boatload of deprecation warnings, eg
>
> In file included from llvmjit_deform.c:27:
> ../../../../src/include/jit/llvmjit_emit.h:112:23: warning:
> 'LLVMBuildStructGEP' is de
Thomas Munro writes:
> This really depends on *their* release cycle, not ours. Hmm. Well,
> if we had a buildfarm animal that ran their latest release branch as
> recently discussed, not their main branch, then we could say "if that
> machine is failing, but seawasp is passing, now is the time t
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:22 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Feb-15, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > My general plan for this stuff is to try to do just one back-patch for
> > each LLVM release, with all the changes in it, to reduce commit churn.
> > Hence commit messages that say "Track LLVM X ..." s
On 2022-Feb-15, Thomas Munro wrote:
> My general plan for this stuff is to try to do just one back-patch for
> each LLVM release, with all the changes in it, to reduce commit churn.
> Hence commit messages that say "Track LLVM X ..." so that it's easy to
> find all the changes for X around the tim
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 4:06 AM Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > This isn't an API change, it's just a missing #include that we got away
> > with before. Per buildfarm animal seawasp.
>
> If it is a somehow *missing* include, should it be back-patched? Not sure,
> just asking.
Arguably (I think it'd wor
Hello Thomas,
This isn't an API change, it's just a missing #include that we got away
with before. Per buildfarm animal seawasp.
If it is a somehow *missing* include, should it be back-patched? Not sure,
just asking.
--
Fabien.
Track LLVM 15 changes.
This isn't an API change, it's just a missing #include that we got away
with before. Per buildfarm animal seawasp.
Branch
--
master
Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/0052fb489008a68d0f3e0445f52e1ab3166632a4
Modified Files
--
src/bac
18 matches
Mail list logo
