We are below 20k open issues now!

[Endill]

As some of you may have noticed, we are at 19 963 open issues now! When I started triaging old Clang bugs in late May, we were at 20 440. This happened despite 1-1.5k new bugs opened in the meantime.

I’d like to thank @wheatman, @widberg, @shafik, @AaronBallman, @ChuanqiXu and others I forgot (sorry!) for taking part in this, and encourage further work.

Recently @arsenm joined this effort, as he has been of tremendous help triaging old LLVM bugs. I’d like to encourage other members of LLVM community who are familiar with LLVM IR and backends to join this effort.

If you are interested in details, you can check out my recent thread about triaging Clang bugs. While it may not be directly applicable to LLVM, but still should be of some help:

Triaging old Clang bugs

I see a number of people jumping onto this topic recently, so I’d like to share my experience. I also hope we can agree on a common approach towards the problem, so that bugs are handled consistently. Compiler Explorer is of great help, as it provides old Clang releases all the way to 3.0. There are couple of common pitfalls using it for triaging: a) Clang 3.1 through 3.8.1 are set to use headers from GCC 6.3.0 toolchain (--gcc-toolchain), including stdlibc++, which is not period-correct, an…

[tobiashieta]

Thank you for all your hard work on this!

[Endill]

Highlights of categories of bugs I have encountered and would like to get help on:

• Clang Static Analyzer: 841 open. Static Analyzer bugs are often properly labeled as such.
• Objective-C: 322 open. At one point I did my best to identify those by keywords and label them accordingly.
• LLVM Crahes: 186 open. In my experience, labeling for old LLVM bugs is all over the place. I often used just llvm:crash for non-Clang crashes that I didn’t know how to classify more precisely. Notably, SelectionDAG crashes ended up labeled this way, because I’m not aware of a dedicated label for SelectionDAG.

[arsenm]

@Endill

Notably, SelectionDAG crashes ended up labeled this way, because I’m not aware of a dedicated label for SelectionDAG.

I think this is covered by llvm:codegen usually, but there should probably be a dedicated selectiondag label

[fhahn]

@Endill

As some of you may have noticed, we are at 19 963 open issues now! When I started triaging old Clang bugs in late May, we were at 20 440. This happened despite 1-1.5k new bugs opened in the meantime.

That’s great news, thank you very much for driving this effort!

[tonic]

This is amazing! Thank you for your efforts.

[steakhal]

I can help you out on the Static Analyzer’s side as my freetime allows.
Thanks for your hard work.

[clattner]

This progress is quite amazing, thank you for all the hard work on this!

[pogo59]

We would be remiss in not acknowledging the ongoing work by @EugeneZelenko to make sure new bugs are being labeled etc correctly!