Skip to content

Conversation

@Zentrik
Copy link
Contributor

@Zentrik Zentrik commented Sep 1, 2024

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/357bd61744bb8cc2b9b07447294fa977e5758550/llvm/lib/ExecutionEngine/IntelJITProfiling/CMakeLists.txt allows specifying the source directory of ittapi. This change allows configuring the source directory of ittapi here as well.

ITTAPI_SOURCE_DIR is what IntelJITProfiling uses, so I presume this is what should be used here. This fixes building for me as I set `ITTAPI_SOURCE_DIR`.
@Zentrik
Copy link
Contributor Author

Zentrik commented Sep 1, 2024

I'm not sure what the process is or whether this is eligible for backporting to v19 but I would like to see this backported.

@Zentrik Zentrik changed the title Fix build of JITLoaderVTune if ITTAPI_SOURCE_DIR is specified Fix build if ITTAPI_SOURCE_DIR is specified Sep 1, 2024
@giordano
Copy link
Contributor

Friendly bump. Anyone interested in reviewing this PR? 🙂

@giordano
Copy link
Contributor

Bump 🙂

@Zentrik
Copy link
Contributor Author

Zentrik commented Jan 15, 2025

@hongyu-dev It looks like your PR broke this, #81825. Do you mind reviewing?

@hongyu-dev
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @lhames could you please take a look at this? Thank you very much. (Lang is the maintainer for Orc, he would be the best reviewer for any change here).

Copy link
Contributor

@lhames lhames left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Thanks @Zentrik!

@lhames lhames merged commit f8287f6 into llvm:main Feb 4, 2025
@lhames
Copy link
Contributor

lhames commented Feb 4, 2025

@Zentrik If you'd like this cherry-pick to the 20.0 release branch you can open an issue for that and comment "/cherry-pick f8287f6" (following the process described in https://groups.google.com/g/llvm-dev/c/SfSqz81zwjg).

@llvmbot
Copy link
Member

llvmbot commented Feb 4, 2025

@Zentrik If you'd like this cherry-pick to the 20.0 release branch you can open an issue for that and comment "/cherry-pick f8287f6" (following the process described in https://groups.google.com/g/llvm-dev/c/SfSqz81zwjg).

Error: Command failed due to missing milestone.

@llvm-ci
Copy link
Collaborator

llvm-ci commented Feb 4, 2025

LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder openmp-s390x-linux running on systemz-1 while building llvm at step 6 "test-openmp".

Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/88/builds/7582

Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference
Step 6 (test-openmp) failure: test (failure)
******************** TEST 'libomp :: tasking/issue-94260-2.c' FAILED ********************
Exit Code: -11

Command Output (stdout):
--
# RUN: at line 1
/home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/./bin/clang -fopenmp   -I /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/src -I /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.src/openmp/runtime/test -L /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/src  -fno-omit-frame-pointer -mbackchain -I /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.src/openmp/runtime/test/ompt /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.src/openmp/runtime/test/tasking/issue-94260-2.c -o /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/test/tasking/Output/issue-94260-2.c.tmp -lm -latomic && /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/test/tasking/Output/issue-94260-2.c.tmp
# executed command: /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/./bin/clang -fopenmp -I /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/src -I /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.src/openmp/runtime/test -L /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/src -fno-omit-frame-pointer -mbackchain -I /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.src/openmp/runtime/test/ompt /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.src/openmp/runtime/test/tasking/issue-94260-2.c -o /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/test/tasking/Output/issue-94260-2.c.tmp -lm -latomic
# executed command: /home/uweigand/sandbox/buildbot/openmp-s390x-linux/llvm.build/runtimes/runtimes-bins/openmp/runtime/test/tasking/Output/issue-94260-2.c.tmp
# note: command had no output on stdout or stderr
# error: command failed with exit status: -11

--

********************


@llvm-ci
Copy link
Collaborator

llvm-ci commented Feb 4, 2025

LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder lld-x86_64-win running on as-worker-93 while building llvm at step 7 "test-build-unified-tree-check-all".

Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/146/builds/2227

Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference
Step 7 (test-build-unified-tree-check-all) failure: test (failure)
******************** TEST 'LLVM-Unit :: Support/./SupportTests.exe/38/87' FAILED ********************
Script(shard):
--
GTEST_OUTPUT=json:C:\a\lld-x86_64-win\build\unittests\Support\.\SupportTests.exe-LLVM-Unit-13088-38-87.json GTEST_SHUFFLE=0 GTEST_TOTAL_SHARDS=87 GTEST_SHARD_INDEX=38 C:\a\lld-x86_64-win\build\unittests\Support\.\SupportTests.exe
--

Script:
--
C:\a\lld-x86_64-win\build\unittests\Support\.\SupportTests.exe --gtest_filter=ProgramEnvTest.CreateProcessLongPath
--
C:\a\lld-x86_64-win\llvm-project\llvm\unittests\Support\ProgramTest.cpp(160): error: Expected equality of these values:
  0
  RC
    Which is: -2

C:\a\lld-x86_64-win\llvm-project\llvm\unittests\Support\ProgramTest.cpp(163): error: fs::remove(Twine(LongPath)): did not return errc::success.
error number: 13
error message: permission denied



C:\a\lld-x86_64-win\llvm-project\llvm\unittests\Support\ProgramTest.cpp:160
Expected equality of these values:
  0
  RC
    Which is: -2

C:\a\lld-x86_64-win\llvm-project\llvm\unittests\Support\ProgramTest.cpp:163
fs::remove(Twine(LongPath)): did not return errc::success.
error number: 13
error message: permission denied




********************


giordano pushed a commit to JuliaLang/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2025
de92615 allows specifying the source directory of ittapi. This
change allows configuring the source directory of ittapi here as well.

(cherry picked from commit f8287f6)
giordano pushed a commit to JuliaLang/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Feb 9, 2025
de92615 allows specifying the source directory of ittapi. This
change allows configuring the source directory of ittapi here as well.

(cherry picked from commit f8287f6)
Icohedron pushed a commit to Icohedron/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Feb 11, 2025
de92615 allows specifying the source directory of ittapi. This
change allows configuring the source directory of ittapi here as well.
Zentrik added a commit to JuliaLang/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2025
de92615 allows specifying the source directory of ittapi. This
change allows configuring the source directory of ittapi here as well.

(cherry picked from commit f8287f6)
(cherry picked from commit 755d8d0)
Zentrik added a commit to JuliaLang/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2025
de92615 allows specifying the source directory of ittapi. This
change allows configuring the source directory of ittapi here as well.

(cherry picked from commit f8287f6)
(cherry picked from commit 755d8d0)
gbaraldi pushed a commit to JuliaLang/llvm-project that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2025
de92615 allows specifying the source directory of ittapi. This
change allows configuring the source directory of ittapi here as well.

(cherry picked from commit f8287f6)
(cherry picked from commit 755d8d0)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants