linaro-toolchain July 2025

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

16 participants
19 discussions

[PATCH] [arm] require armv7 support for [PR120424] (was: Re: [PATCH, FYI?] [arm] [vxworks] require thumb2 for pr120424.C)

by Alexandre Oliva

On Jun 19, 2025, Alexandre Oliva <oliva(a)adacore.com> wrote: > Or maybe the requirements for this testcase should be stated as > arm_arch_v7? I'd have to add arm_arch_v7 to > check_effective_target_arm_arch_FUNC_ok et al, if there aren't reasons > why it's not there, but I'd be happy to do that, and use dg-add-options > instead of an explicit -march=armv7, like pr117675.c, if that would be > preferred. It turned out that the regression report I got from linaro was related https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1599 While testing a configuration with -mfloat-abi=hard, -marmv7 is rejected because it doesn't have an FPU. Requiring thumb2 wouldn't have avoided this failure, but requiring armv7 is a proper fix for both problems. (sorry it me took so long; I'm still busy busy with other fp2sp-elimination-disabled-during-lra problems affecting arm) Without stating the architecture version required by the test, test runs with options that are incompatible with the required architecture version fail, e.g. -mfloat-abi=hard. armv7 was not covered by the long list of arm variants in target-supports.exp, so add it, and use it for the effective target requirement and for the option. Tested on arm-eabi, and also on arm-vx7r2 with gcc-14. Ok to install? for gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog PR rtl-optimization/120424 * lib/target-supports.exp (arm arches): Add arm_arch_v7. * g++.target/arm/pr120424.C: Require armv7 support. Use dg-add-options arm_arch_v7 instead of explicit -march=armv7. --- gcc/testsuite/g++.target/arm/pr120424.C | 4 +++- gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp | 1 + 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.target/arm/pr120424.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.target/arm/pr120424.C index 4d0e49013c04a..40295ac80da93 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.target/arm/pr120424.C +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.target/arm/pr120424.C @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ /* { dg-do compile } */ -/* { dg-options "-march=armv7 -O2 -fstack-clash-protection -fnon-call-exceptions" } */ +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v7_ok } */ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fstack-clash-protection -fnon-call-exceptions" } */ +/* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v7 } */ /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {#-8} } } */ /* LRA register elimination gets confused when register spilling causes arm_frame_pointer_required to switch from false to true, and diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp index dfffe3adfbdd0..858fa1787f19c 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp @@ -6073,6 +6073,7 @@ foreach { armfunc armflag armdefs } { v6z_arm "-march=armv6z+fp -marm" "__ARM_ARCH_6Z__ && !__thumb__" v6z_thumb "-march=armv6z+fp -mthumb -mfloat-abi=softfp" "__ARM_ARCH_6Z__ && __thumb__" v6m "-march=armv6-m -mthumb -mfloat-abi=soft" __ARM_ARCH_6M__ + v7 "-march=armv7" __ARM_ARCH_7__ v7a "-march=armv7-a+fp" __ARM_ARCH_7A__ v7a_arm "-march=armv7-a+fp -marm" "__ARM_ARCH_7A__ && !__thumb__" v7a_fp_hard "-march=armv7-a+fp -mfpu=auto -mfloat-abi=hard" __ARM_ARCH_7A__ -- Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://blog.lx.oliva.nom.br/ Free Software Activist FSFLA co-founder GNU Toolchain Engineer More tolerance and less prejudice are key for inclusion and diversity. Excluding neuro-others for not behaving ""normal"" is *not* inclusive!

1 week, 3 days

How can I reproduce a flang-arm64-windows-msvc LLVM buildbot error?

by tobias.gysi＠nextsilicon.com

Dear Linaro Community, I am looking for advice on how to reproduce a flang-arm64-windows-msvc LLVM build bot failure (hopefully I ended up in the right place here). I had to revert an LLVM PR (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150783) that broke the flang-arm64-windows-msvc LLVM buildbot yesterday due to some tablegen-related problem. I did prepare a reland PR (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/151125) that addresses a potential issue. However, since I did not see any other buildbot failures and since I was not able to reproduce the problem locally, I wonder if there is a way to run the flang-arm64-windows-msvc buildbot on my reland PR? Alternatively, hints on how to reproduce the problem locally on a x86 Linux machine would be appreciated. Best, Tobias

1 month

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 9 patches in gdb: 23 regressions 3 fixes on arm

by Thiago Jung Bauermann

Hello Tom, ci_notify(a)linaro.org writes: > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details > below. > > In gdb_check master-arm, after: > | 9 patches in gdb > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/117104 > | 02107b8252d [PATCH 9/9] [gdb/testsuite] Add gdb.tui/tui-mode-switch.exp > | 74b2f1eb572 [PATCH 8/9] [gdb/testsuite] Add Term::with_term > | 6f3e219e902 [PATCH 7/9] [gdb/testsuite] Add Term::_esc_0x3d and Term::_esc_0x3e > | 9d1466d5f3f [PATCH 6/9] [gdb/testsuite] Add Term::_esc_0x28_B and Term::_esc_0x28_0 > | 2c51f81639a [PATCH 5/9] [gdb/testsuite] Add Term::_csi_r > | ... and 4 more patches in gdb > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 0937ed3f050 Add forgotten ChangeLog entry for commit > | 7c1c13e896c76879bcf3fb29332e0a59918bc9e0. > > Produces 23 regressions 3 fixes: <snip> > Current build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-precommit/5001/artifac… > Reference build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3017/artifact/ar… This is a false positive. We're currently moving our CI jobs to another machine (of a different kind, even) and the reference build ran on the new machine while the build with the patches ran on the old one. Sorry for the noise. -- Thiago

1 month

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 3 patches in gdb: 23 regressions 3 fixes on arm

by Thiago Jung Bauermann

Hello Tom, ci_notify(a)linaro.org writes: > In gdb_check master-arm, after: > | 3 patches in gdb > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/117137 > | a05322508b7 [PATCH 3/3] Require Tcl 8.6.2 > | 2b7dc482e23 [PATCH 2/3] Rewrite tcl_version_at_least > | a88c3d9f501 [PATCH 1/3] Require Tcl 8.5 > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 0937ed3f050 Add forgotten ChangeLog entry for commit > | 7c1c13e896c76879bcf3fb29332e0a59918bc9e0. > > Produces 23 regressions 3 fixes: <snip> > Current build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-precommit/5004/artifac… > Reference build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3017/artifact/ar… This is a false positive. We're currently moving our CI jobs to another machine (of a different kind, even) and the reference build ran on the new machine while the build with the patches ran on the old one. The same happened with the other patch about which we notified you today. Sorry for the noise. -- Thiago

1 month

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb patch #117052: 23 regressions 3 fixes on arm

by Thiago Jung Bauermann

Hello, ci_notify(a)linaro.org writes: > In gdb_check master-arm, after: > | gdb patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/117052 > | Author: Aria Nolan <aria(a)chytrid.org> > | Date: Sat Jul 26 18:44:40 2025 -0600 > | > | [PATCH] gdb: turn off completions for the inferior command > | > | The inferior command takes an inferior ID as an argument. The current > | completer for the command offers symbols. This patch removes the completion, > | since the IDs are sequential so it makes little sense to offer that. > | ... 2 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 0937ed3f050 Add forgotten ChangeLog entry for commit > | 7c1c13e896c76879bcf3fb29332e0a59918bc9e0. > > Produces 23 regressions 3 fixes: <snip> > Current build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-precommit/5000/artifac… > Reference build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3017/artifact/ar… This is a false positive. We're currently moving our CI jobs to another machine (of a different kind, even) and the reference build ran on the new machine while the build with the patch ran on the old one. Sorry for the noise. -- Thiago

1 month

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #117089: 84 regressions 2 fixes on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Hi Nathan, Sorry this report is incorrect because we are in the process of moving to new machines. Please ignore it. Sorry for the noise. Thanks, Christophe On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 at 04:34, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In gcc_check master-aarch64, after: > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/117089 > | Author: Nathan Myers <ncm(a)cantrip.org> > | Date: Mon Jul 28 05:25:55 2025 -0400 > | > | [PATCHv5] libstdc++: Add NTTP bind_front, -back, not_fn (P2714) [PR119744] > | > | Stabilizing. > | > | Changes in v5: > | ... 39 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | a51bf9e10182 ifcvt: Fix ifcvt for multiple phi nodes after factoring operator [PR121236] > > Produces 84 regressions 2 fixes: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running g++:g++.dg/dg.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.dg/cpp1z/pr85569.C -std=c++20 (test for excess errors) > | Running g++:g++.dg/modules/modules.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_b.C -std=c++26 (internal compiler error: canonical types differ for identical types 'auto' and 'auto') > | FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_b.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) > | ... and 83 more > | > | fixes.sum: > | Running g++:g++.target/aarch64/sve/acle/aarch64-sve-acle.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/general/cops.c -march=armv8.2-a+sve -moverride=tune=none execution test > | Running gcc:gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/aarch64-sve-acle.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/general/cops.c -march=armv8.2-a+sve -moverride=tune=none execution test > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gcc_check master-aarch64 > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu > > If you have any questions regarding this report, please ask on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list. > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > > The information below contains the details of the failures, and the ways to reproduce a debug environment: > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11852/ar… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11852/ar… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11852/ar… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11852/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/4055/artifac… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files.

1 month

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #117090: 6976 regressions 2 fixes on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Hi Richard, Sorry this report is incorrect because we are in the process of moving to new machines. Please ignore it. Sorry for the noise. Thanks, Christophe On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 at 04:11, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In gcc_check master-aarch64, after: > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/117090 > | Author: Richard Biener <rguenther(a)suse.de> > | Date: Mon Jul 28 11:36:06 2025 +0200 > | > | [PATCH] Remove STMT_VINFO_MEMORY_ACCESS_TYPE > | > | This should be present only on SLP nodes now. The RISC-V changes > | are mechanical along the line of the SLP_TREE_TYPE changes. > | > | ... 19 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | a51bf9e1018 ifcvt: Fix ifcvt for multiple phi nodes after factoring operator [PR121236] > > Produces 6976 regressions 2 fixes: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running g++:g++.dg/dg.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr112374.C -std=gnu++11 (internal compiler error: Segmentation fault) > | FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr112374.C -std=gnu++11 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr112374.C -std=gnu++17 (internal compiler error: Segmentation fault) > | FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr112374.C -std=gnu++17 (test for excess errors) > | ... and 6984 more > | > | fixes.sum: > | Running g++:g++.target/aarch64/sve/acle/aarch64-sve-acle.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/general/cops.c -march=armv8.2-a+sve -moverride=tune=none execution test > | Running gcc:gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/aarch64-sve-acle.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/general/cops.c -march=armv8.2-a+sve -moverride=tune=none execution test > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gcc_check master-aarch64 > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu > > If you have any questions regarding this report, please ask on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list. > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > > The information below contains the details of the failures, and the ways to reproduce a debug environment: > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11853/ar… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11853/ar… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11853/ar… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/11853/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/4055/artifac… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files.

1 month

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-2319-gb5ffc8e75a8: 2 regressions on aarch64

by Yury Khrustalev

On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 10:42:41AM +0000, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. It appears that this build was running tests on qemu that doesn't seem to support the same signal handling behaviour for SME as would the kernel that supports SME. On a system that supports SME with kernel 6.16 these tests work as expected provided that their dependencies are resolved by dynamic loader to the new version of libgcc. So, no issue in the patch or in the tests. Thanks, Yury IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.

1 month

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-2319-gb5ffc8e75a8: 2 regressions on aarch64

by Yury Khrustalev

> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Thanks, I'm looking into it. Kind regards, Yury IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.

1 month, 1 week

[ARM EABI] Adjust 'libgomp.c++/target-cdtor-{1,2}.C' for 'targetm.cxx.use_aeabi_atexit' [PR119853, PR119854] (was: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-130-gaafe942227b: 10 regressions on arm)

by Thomas Schwinge

Hi! On 2025-04-26T00:09:21+0000, ci_notify--- via Gcc-regression <gcc-regression(a)gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In gcc_check master-arm, after: > | commit gcc-16-130-gaafe942227b > | Author: Thomas Schwinge <tschwinge(a)baylibre.com> > | Date: Wed Apr 23 10:51:48 2025 +0200 > | > | GCN, nvptx offloading: Host/device compatibility: Itanium C++ ABI, DSO Object Destruction API [PR119853, PR119854] > | > | '__dso_handle' for '__cxa_atexit', '__cxa_finalize'. See > | <https://itanium-cxx-abi.github.io/cxx-abi/abi.html#dso-dtor>. > | > | ... 13 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 10 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running libgomp:libgomp.c++/c++.exp ... > | FAIL: libgomp.c++/target-cdtor-1.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized "gimple_call <__cxa_atexit, " 4 > | FAIL: libgomp.c++/target-cdtor-1.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized "gimple_call <__cxa_atexit, NULL, _ZN1SD1Ev, \\&sH1, \\&__dso_handle>" 1 > | FAIL: libgomp.c++/target-cdtor-1.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized "gimple_call <__cxa_atexit, NULL, _ZN1SD1Ev, \\&sH2, \\&__dso_handle>" 1 > | FAIL: libgomp.c++/target-cdtor-1.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized "gimple_call <__cxa_atexit, NULL, _ZN1SD1Ev, \\&sHD1, \\&__dso_handle>" 1 > | ... and 6 more > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gcc_check master-arm > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1568. Is it expected that I'm not able to log into the Jira instance, and that most of the links in there are either: | Secure Connection Failed | | An error occurred during a connection to git-us.linaro.org. Cannot communicate securely with peer: no common encryption algorithm(s). ..., or: | Oops! | | Not Found | | This page may not exist, or you may not have permission to see it. > Please let us know if you have a fix. I should have a fix: the attached "Adjust 'libgomp.c++/target-cdtor-{1,2}.C' for 'targetm.cxx.use_aeabi_atexit' [PR119853, PR119854]" ought to address this. I've "mock-tested" this locally; is there a way for me to run this through the Linaro "pre-commit" CI? Grüße Thomas > If you have any questions regarding this report, please ask on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list. > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > > The information below contains the details of the failures, and the ways to reproduce a debug environment: > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3752/artifact/ar… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3752/artifact/ar… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3752/artifact/ar… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3752/artifact/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3751/artifact/ar… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > > Full commit : https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=aafe942227baf8c2bcd4cac2c…

1 month, 1 week

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain July 2025