Skip to content

llvmPackages_20: 20.1.6 -> 20.1.8#414615

Merged
RossComputerGuy merged 1 commit intoNixOS:stagingfrom
RossComputerGuy:feat/llvm-20.1.6
Jul 29, 2025
Merged

llvmPackages_20: 20.1.6 -> 20.1.8#414615
RossComputerGuy merged 1 commit intoNixOS:stagingfrom
RossComputerGuy:feat/llvm-20.1.6

Conversation

@RossComputerGuy
Copy link
Member

@RossComputerGuy RossComputerGuy commented Jun 7, 2025

Things done

Moves #412518 to staging because master -> staging-next caused a mass rebuild and so the PR was reverted.

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Nixpkgs 25.11 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 Nixpkgs Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • NixOS 25.11 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 NixOS Release notes)
    • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
    • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the 6.topic: llvm/clang Issues related to llvmPackages, clangStdenv and related label Jun 7, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-darwin: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and must target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and must target the staging branches. 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by a maintainer of all the package it changes. labels Jun 7, 2025
@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Jun 7, 2025

Could we do this with a revert of the revert, so the previous attempt is easily discoverable from the commit log? :)

@RossComputerGuy
Copy link
Member Author

RossComputerGuy commented Jun 7, 2025

Do I just need to rename the commit and PR or do some git magic?

@RossComputerGuy
Copy link
Member Author

RossComputerGuy commented Jun 9, 2025

Tried git revert and got:

Auto-merging pkgs/development/compilers/llvm/common/llvm/default.nix
On branch feat/llvm-20.1.6
nothing to commit, working tree clean

Tried git cherry-pick on a GitHub made revert:

Auto-merging pkgs/development/compilers/llvm/common/llvm/default.nix
On branch feat/llvm-20.1.6
You are currently cherry-picking commit 11bcc51e079a.
  (all conflicts fixed: run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

nothing to commit, working tree clean
The previous cherry-pick is now empty, possibly due to conflict resolution.
If you wish to commit it anyway, use:

    git commit --allow-empty

Otherwise, please use 'git cherry-pick --skip'

I have no idea why this is happening.

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Jun 9, 2025

Do I just need to rename the commit and PR or do some git magic?

You could just do the commit message yourself. The default git one is just quite good and contains all the information.

Tried git revert and got:

Auto-merging pkgs/development/compilers/llvm/common/llvm/default.nix
On branch feat/llvm-20.1.6
nothing to commit, working tree clean

This is probably because you were running it on this branch, which already has the change reverted? I imagine if you hard reset the branch to its base then the revert would work.

@RossComputerGuy
Copy link
Member Author

RossComputerGuy commented Jun 9, 2025

I already did a hard reset

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the 11.by: package-maintainer This PR was created by a maintainer of all the package it changes. label Jun 13, 2025
@RossComputerGuy RossComputerGuy changed the title llvmPackages_20: 20.1.5 -> 20.1.6 llvmPackages_20: 20.1.6 -> 20.1.7 Jun 13, 2025
@wolfgangwalther

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view
@alexarice alexarice mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2025
Merged
@MisileLab
Copy link
Contributor

MisileLab commented Jul 9, 2025

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/releases/tag/llvmorg-20.1.8 released

@RossComputerGuy RossComputerGuy changed the title llvmPackages_20: 20.1.6 -> 20.1.7 llvmPackages_20: 20.1.6 -> 20.1.8 Jul 9, 2025
@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch labels Jul 18, 2025
@alexarice
Copy link
Contributor

alexarice commented Jul 26, 2025

Is there a blocker for this? Would be great to have this change.

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Jul 28, 2025
alyssais
alyssais approved these changes Jul 28, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@alyssais alyssais left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I got confused about this PR. From what I can tell, this was originally an update from 20.1.5 to 20.1.6, then that update got cherry-picked onto staging-next and pushed directly without a note on this PR by @K900, and then this PR was quietly turned into a 20.1.6 to 20.1.8 update PR, making my previous comments obsolete. I think??

Anyway, looks fine in its current state. If I'm right about what happened, would have been significantly less confusing to do so by merging the PR into staging-next, and then opening a new one for the next update…

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Jul 28, 2025

OfBorg failure was also a bit confusing — I guess if there's no SPIRV version available for an LLVM version, we should just not have a libclc attribute, rather than causing an error?

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons. and removed 12.approvals: 1 This PR was reviewed and approved by one person. labels Jul 28, 2025
@RossComputerGuy RossComputerGuy merged commit f03dd8b into NixOS:staging Jul 29, 2025
26 of 28 checks passed
@RossComputerGuy RossComputerGuy deleted the feat/llvm-20.1.6 branch July 29, 2025 14:46
@alyssais alyssais mentioned this pull request Jul 29, 2025
Merged
13 tasks
@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Jul 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

OfBorg failure was also a bit confusing — I guess if there's no SPIRV version available for an LLVM version, we should just not have a libclc attribute, rather than causing an error?

#429382

alyssais added a commit to alyssais/nixpkgs that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2025
@alyssais
llvmPackages: drop libclc attributes that error
09492fa 
libclc requires a compatible version of spirv-llvm-translator.  If we
don't have such a version, we get an eval error.  This means that
OfBorg builds of llvmPackages sets where libclc is unavailable will
produce an eval error, which is very confusing.  To fix this, restrict
the libclc attribute to LLVM versions where it actually exists.

Link: NixOS#414615 (comment)
alyssais added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 30, 2025
@alyssais
llvmPackages: drop libclc attributes that error
cfb6649 
libclc requires a compatible version of spirv-llvm-translator.  If we
don't have such a version, we get an eval error.  This means that
OfBorg builds of llvmPackages sets where libclc is unavailable will
produce an eval error, which is very confusing.  To fix this, restrict
the libclc attribute to LLVM versions where it actually exists.

Link: #414615 (comment)
@nixpkgs-ci
Copy link
Contributor

nixpkgs-ci bot commented Sep 14, 2025

Successfully created backport PR for staging-25.05:

@github-actions github-actions bot added the 8.has: port to stable This PR already has a backport to the stable release. label Sep 14, 2025
@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot mentioned this pull request Sep 14, 2025
Closed
1 task
@alyssais
Copy link
Member

alyssais commented Sep 14, 2025

Let's all try to remember to backport these!

@nixpkgs-ci
Copy link
Contributor

nixpkgs-ci bot commented Sep 14, 2025

Successfully created backport PR for release-25.05:

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot mentioned this pull request Sep 14, 2025
Merged
1 task
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@alyssais alyssais alyssais approved these changes

@Ericson2314 Ericson2314 Awaiting requested review from Ericson2314

@dtzWill dtzWill Awaiting requested review from dtzWill

@rrbutani rrbutani Awaiting requested review from rrbutani

@lovek323 lovek323 Awaiting requested review from lovek323

@sternenseemann sternenseemann Awaiting requested review from sternenseemann

+1 more reviewer

@ibizaman ibizaman ibizaman approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

6.topic: llvm/clang Issues related to llvmPackages, clangStdenv and related 8.has: port to stable This PR already has a backport to the stable release. 10.rebuild-darwin: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-darwin: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Darwin and must target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 501+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and should normally target the staging branches. 10.rebuild-linux: 5001+ This PR causes many rebuilds on Linux and must target the staging branches. 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two persons.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@RossComputerGuy @alyssais @wolfgangwalther @MisileLab @alexarice @ibizaman