-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
1.19 powerpc64le run-pass test failures: simd-intrinsic-generic-cast #44670
Comments
@TimNN do you think this could be rust-lang/llvm#72 ? We haven't patched our LLVM in Debian yet. |
@infinity0: I honestly have no idea. It doesn't look like, did you enable LLVM assertions in that build? |
I don't enable LLVM assertions on purpose and I guess they're not enabled by default. The same test also failed on Fedora. From IRC:
I guess if no-one pipes up I'll just ignore this test for the time being. |
I re-ran BTW this is technically a regression, this test passed on Debian and Fedora before with 1.18, although markos from Debian's IRC thinks it's not really a regression, see the above quoted comments for details. Also the smallest-hello-world error I think now is unrelated, I will move that to another bug report once I have some more details about it. |
|
Presence or lack of VSX intrinsics in rust is irrelevant in this context, as the generated LLVM is calling regular If LLVM was upgraded in any way recently, that’s where the bug is happening. The code rustc generates appears to be exactly the same as I remember it being ages ago. |
Thanks for the clarification. Indeed, both Fedora and Debian are using a less-patched LLVM 4.0 than Rust, and this is the first Rust version that uses 4.0. I'll go over the differences when I next have time and see if any patches are suggestive. |
I can still reproduce this, even with rust using its own LLVM 6, and it gets the exact same output!
|
It appears that LLVM is generating the See also: |
the linked llvm bug has been fixed quite a while ago, has this issue been resolved by that? |
Yeah, we should be good here. |
On Debian:
Not sure if this is related to #42778
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: