octave-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #56425] Patch for the JIT


From: Julien Bect
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #56425] Patch for the JIT
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 03:19:44 -0400 (EDT)
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0

Follow-up Comment #5, bug #56425 (project octave):

I have built Octave default (30f53f7a7293184f38b832a6494901636f5f2015) with
the four patches applied, on Debian unstable with LLVM 8.0.

-----

1) The build succeeds and here is the result of make check:

                                                    (reported bug) XFAIL   2
Summary:
fixed/jit.tst .................................................. PASS   36/38 


  PASS                            15604
  FAIL                                1
  XFAIL (reported bug)               27
  SKIP (missing feature)              9
  SKIP (run-time condition)          34

So, this patch fixes bug #55809: "Building with --enable-jit fails since the
recent variable storage refactoring".

-----

2) The following snippet from bug #55492, comment #2, no longer crashes
octave:


jit_enable (1)
m = [1 2; 3 4];
while (1)
  z = m(1, 2);
  break;
endwhile


The original bug report was for LLVM 4.0, which I haven't tested yet, but
apart from that I would that this patch fixes bug #55492 too.

-----

3) The following snippet from bug #55469, comment #2, no longer crashes
octave:


jit_enable (true);
jit_startcnt (5);

x = 1 + 1i;
for j = 1:5
    x = x + 1;
endfor


So, it appears that this patch also fixes bug #55469 ;-)

-----

4) Also, the following snippet from bug #53691 no longer crashes octave:


jit_enable (1)
f = inline ("x^2 + 2");
f(1)


So, it appears that this patch fixes bug #53691 too !

-----

Summary: this patch makes it possible to build Octave with LLVM 8 and solves
four open issues.

I haven't carried out a detailed code review, nor will I have time to do it in
the near future, but from an "external" point of view I would vote for pushing
this to default.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?56425>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]