linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

3 participants
5603 discussions

by Peter Maydell

Progress (short week, 3 days): * UM-2 [QEMU upstream maintainership] - more softfreeze related work: tagged rc0 this week - spent some time looking through Huawei's FEAT_NMI patchset; this is in basically good shape but there are a number of minor bugs/missing bits of the feature for them to work through still - reviewed a patchset adding nucleo-g071rb (an STM32G0 based board) -- PMM

1 year, 3 months

LLVM buildbot clang-aarch64-full-2stage

by orlando.hyams＠sony.com

Hi, I noticed this address registered as the admin for this LLVM buildbot - https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/workers/134). I caused a failure at the start of the week (https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/179/builds/9629). I think it's a build (or test) configuration problem as outlined in this small PR https://github.com/llvm/llvm-zorg/pull/139. I can see the bot is currently failing now too (https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/179/builds/9681). I haven't looked at it closely but given the same tests are failing in a similar way (a different bitcode error from LLD), I imagine that might also be fixed by my llvm-zorg pull request above? Please can someone look at the llvm-zorg pull request when you have a spare moment? I have my LLVM change that caused the initial failure reverted in the meantime. Thanks, Orlando

1 year, 3 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-14-9478-gdf483ebd246: FAIL: 7 regressions on aarch64

by Jonathan Wakely

Oops. Jakub has fixed this now. On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 23:45, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. > > We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1177 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In gcc_check master-aarch64 after: > > | commit gcc-14-9478-gdf483ebd246 > | Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Mon Feb 26 13:17:13 2024 +0000 > | > | libstdc++: Add nodiscard in <algorithm> > | > | Add the [[nodiscard]] attribute to several functions in <algorithm>. > | These all have no side effects and are only called for their return > | value (e.g. std::count) or produce a result that must not be discarded > | for correctness (e.g. std::remove). > | > | ... 49 lines of the commit log omitted. > > FAIL: 7 regressions > > regressions.sum: > === g++ tests === > > Running g++:g++.dg/torture/dg-torture.exp ... > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr104601.C -O0 (test for excess errors) > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr104601.C -O1 (test for excess errors) > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr104601.C -O2 (test for excess errors) > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr104601.C -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for excess errors) > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr104601.C -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for excess errors) > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr104601.C -O3 -g (test for excess errors) > FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr104601.C -Os (test for excess errors) > ... and 1 more entries > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/1715/artifac… > The full lists of regressions and progressions as well as configure and make commands are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/1715/artifac… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/1715/artifac… > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_check master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/1715/artifac… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/1714/artifac… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > > Full commit : https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/df483ebd24689a3bebfae2089637a00eca… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_gcc_check > ** master-aarch64 > *** FAIL: 7 regressions > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/1715/artifac…

1 year, 3 months

[ACTIVITY] report week ending 14 Mar

by Peter Maydell

Progress (short week, 3 days): * UM-2 [QEMU upstream maintainership] - softfreeze week this week, so a lot of time shepherding patches and pullrequests upstream, looking to see if we have any bugs that we ought to fix for 9.0, etc - looked at our Coverity results and submitted patches for seven random easy-to-fix issues -- PMM

1 year, 3 months

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.39.9000-100-g2367bf468c: FAIL: 1 regressions on arm

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1176 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. In master-arm after: | commit glibc-2.39.9000-100-g2367bf468c | Author: Joseph Myers <josmyers(a)redhat.com> | Date: Wed Mar 13 19:46:21 2024 +0000 | | Update kernel version to 6.8 in header constant tests | | This patch updates the kernel version in the tests tst-mman-consts.py, | tst-mount-consts.py and tst-pidfd-consts.py to 6.8. (There are no new | constants covered by these tests in 6.8 that need any other header | changes.) | | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. FAIL: 1 regressions regressions.sum: === glibc tests === Running glibc:misc ... FAIL: misc/tst-pidfd-consts You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/623… The full lists of regressions and progressions as well as configure and make commands are in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/623… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/623… The configuration of this build is: CI config tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc master-arm -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/623… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/622… Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/glibc/… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=2367bf468ce43801de98… List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : * tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc ** master-arm *** FAIL: 1 regressions *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/glibc/… *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/623…

1 year, 3 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb-14-branchpoint-1411-g033bc67bdb0: FAIL: 2 regressions on arm

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

> On Jan 30, 2024, at 23:03, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. > > We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1136 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In master-arm after: > > | commit gdb-14-branchpoint-1411-g033bc67bdb0 > | Author: Tom Tromey <tom(a)tromey.com> > | Date: Tue Sep 19 17:39:31 2023 -0600 > | > | Only search types in cp_lookup_rtti_type > | > | This changes cp_lookup_rtti_type to only search for types -- not > | functions or variables. Due to the symbol-matching hack, this could > | just use SEARCH_TYPE_DOMAIN, but I think it's better to be clear; also > | I hold on to some hope that perhaps the hack can someday be removed. > > FAIL: 2 regressions > > regressions.sum: > === libstdc++ tests === > > Running libstdc++:libstdc++-prettyprinters/prettyprinters.exp ... > FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/cxx11.cc print ecmiaow > FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/cxx11.cc print emiaow Hi Tom, Hi Jonathan, After the above GDB patch I see 2 new failures both for aarch64-linux-gnu and arm-linux-gnueabihf in GCC's libstdc++ testsuite. The log [1] says: === $35 = warning: RTTI symbol not found for class 'main::custom_cat' warning: RTTI symbol not found for class 'main::custom_cat' got: $35 = warning: RTTI symbol not found for class 'main::custom_cat' FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/cxx11.cc print emiaow skipping: warning: RTTI symbol not found for class 'main::custom_cat' std::error_code = {std::_V2::error_category: 42} skipping: std::error_code = {std::_V2::error_category: 42} $36 = warning: RTTI symbol not found for class 'main::custom_cat' warning: RTTI symbol not found for class 'main::custom_cat' got: $36 = warning: RTTI symbol not found for class 'main::custom_cat' FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/cxx11.cc print ecmiaow === Which way should I dig -- GDB or libstdc++? Does this look like libstdc++ testcase needs an update? [1] https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/l… Thanks! -- Maxim Kuvyrkov https://www.linaro.org > > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-arm-build/987/a… > The full lists of regressions and progressions as well as configure and make commands are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-arm-build/987/a… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-arm-build/987/a… > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc master-arm > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-arm-build/987/a… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-arm-build/986/a… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gdb/sh… > > Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=033bc67bdb0c7… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc > ** master-arm > *** FAIL: 2 regressions > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gdb/sh… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-arm-build/987/a…

1 year, 3 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb-14-branchpoint-1356-g7737b133640: FAIL: 1 regressions on arm

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

> On Jan 27, 2024, at 17:25, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. > > We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1121 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In master-arm after: > > | commit gdb-14-branchpoint-1356-g7737b133640 > | Author: Tom Tromey <tromey(a)adacore.com> > | Date: Tue Jan 9 11:47:17 2024 -0700 > | > | Handle DW_AT_endianity on enumeration types > | > | A user found that gdb would not correctly print a field from an Ada > | record using the scalar storage order feature. We tracked this down > | to a combination of problems. > | > | First, GCC did not emit DW_AT_endianity on the enumeration type. > | ... 14 lines of the commit log omitted. > > FAIL: 1 regressions > > regressions.sum: > === gdb tests === > > Running gdb:gdb.ada/scalar_storage.exp ... > FAIL: gdb.ada/scalar_storage.exp: print V_BE Hi Tom, I see the above failure for both aarch64-linux-gnu and arm-linux-gnueabihf in our testing. The log shows ([1]): === Breakpoint 1, storage () at /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_2/gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/scalar_storage/storage.adb:53 53 Do_Nothing (V_LE'Address); -- START (gdb) print V_LE $1 = (value => 126, another_value => 12, color => green) (gdb) PASS: gdb.ada/scalar_storage.exp: print V_LE get_compiler_info: gcc-14-0-1 print V_BE $2 = (value => 126, another_value => 12, color => red) (gdb) FAIL: gdb.ada/scalar_storage.exp: print V_BE === Any idea what can be causing this? This failure happens in CI configurations where we track tip-of-trunk GCC. [1] https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/l… Thanks, -- Maxim Kuvyrkov https://www.linaro.org > > === Results Summary === > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1076/… . > The full lists of regressions and progressions are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1076/… . > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1076/… . > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb master-arm > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1076/… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1075/… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gdb/sh… > > Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=7737b1336402c… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb > ** master-arm > *** FAIL: 1 regressions > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gdb/sh… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1076/…

1 year, 3 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-14-8680-g2f14c0dbb78: FAIL: 3 regressions on arm

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

> On Feb 1, 2024, at 16:07, ci_notify--- via Gcc-regression <gcc-regression(a)gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. > > We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1140 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In gcc_check master-arm after: > > | commit gcc-14-8680-g2f14c0dbb78 > | Author: Roger Sayle <roger(a)nextmovesoftware.com> > | Date: Thu Feb 1 06:10:42 2024 +0000 > | > | PR target/113560: Enhance is_widening_mult_rhs_p. > | > | This patch resolves PR113560, a code quality regression from GCC12 > | affecting x86_64, by enhancing the middle-end's tree-ssa-math-opts.cc > | to recognize more instances of widening multiplications. > | > | The widening multiplication perception code identifies cases like: > | ... 116 lines of the commit log omitted. > > FAIL: 3 regressions > > regressions.sum: > === gcc tests === > > Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... > FAIL: gcc.target/arm/wmul-5.c scan-assembler umlal > FAIL: gcc.target/arm/wmul-6.c scan-assembler smlalbb > FAIL: gcc.target/arm/wmul-7.c scan-assembler umlal Hi Roger, Your patch seems to regress the above 3 tests for all 32-bit ARM targets (see [1]). Would you please check if the regressions can be avoided? For reference, here are configure options we use for arm-linux-gnueabihf cross-toolchain: [2]. [1] https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1140 [2] https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/1303/a… Thanks! -- Maxim Kuvyrkov https://www.linaro.org > > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1650/artifact/ar… > The full lists of regressions and progressions as well as configure and make commands are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1650/artifact/ar… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1650/artifact/ar… > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_check master-arm > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1650/artifact/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1649/artifact/ar… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > > Full commit : https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/2f14c0dbb789852947cb58fdf7d3162413… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_gcc_check > ** master-arm > *** FAIL: 3 regressions > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1650/artifact/ar…

1 year, 3 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-14-8492-g1a8261e047f: FAIL: 3 regressions on arm

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

> On Jan 30, 2024, at 00:35, ci_notify--- via Gcc-regression <gcc-regression(a)gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. > > We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1132 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In gcc_check master-arm after: > > | commit gcc-14-8492-g1a8261e047f > | Author: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford(a)arm.com> > | Date: Mon Jan 29 12:33:08 2024 +0000 > | > | vect: Tighten vect_determine_precisions_from_range [PR113281] > | > | This was another PR caused by the way that > | vect_determine_precisions_from_range handles shifts. We tried to > | narrow 32768 >> x to a 16-bit shift based on range information for > | the inputs and outputs, with vect_recog_over_widening_pattern > | (after PR110828) adjusting the shift amount. But this doesn't > | ... 36 lines of the commit log omitted. > > FAIL: 3 regressions > > regressions.sum: > === gcc tests === > > Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/simd/simd.exp ... > FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/mve-vshr.c scan-assembler-times vneg.s[0-9]+\\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 6 > FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/mve-vshr.c scan-assembler-times vshl.s[0-9]+\\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 3 > FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/mve-vshr.c scan-assembler-times vshl.u[0-9]+\\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 3 Hi Richard, Could you please check whether the above tests need an update after your patch? We see these tests now consistently failing across all 32-bit ARM configurations that we track (see [1]). As an example, our configure options for arm-linux-gnueabihf that show the failure are at [2]. [1] https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1132 [2] https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/lastSuccessfulBu… Thanks! -- Maxim Kuvyrkov https://www.linaro.org > > === Results Summary === > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1636/artifact/ar… . > The full lists of regressions and progressions are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1636/artifact/ar… . > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1636/artifact/ar… . > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_check master-arm > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1636/artifact/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1635/artifact/ar… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > > Full commit : https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/1a8261e047f7a2c2b0afb95716f7615cba… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_gcc_check > ** master-arm > *** FAIL: 3 regressions > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/1636/artifact/ar…

1 year, 3 months

[ACTIVITY] report week ending 8 Mar

by Peter Maydell

Progress: * UM-2 [QEMU upstream maintainership] - code review (softfreeze is next week!): + Add device STM32L4x5 RCC + Add support for I2C in BCM2835 boards + hw/scsi/lsi53c895a: add timer to scripts processing + target/arm: Do memory alignment check for device memory + linux-user: Implement some prctls + some minor patches fixing CI job breakage (FreeBSD 13.2 -> 13.3 change, Python has dropped 'distutils') + a patchset improving the robustness of the elf2dmp utility when fed a corrupt crashfile + get our Coverity Scan submission under gitlab CI control rather than a developer's work machine - summarised discussion about deprecating older Arm board models; sent out patch to mark deprecated all PXA2xx and OMAP2 boards, plus one OMAP1 board that we have no test images for - triaged some new Coverity issues * QEMU-530 [QEMU ARMv9.5 Baseline CPU for TCG] - Sent FEAT_ECV patchset out for code review, addressed minor review comments -- PMM

1 year, 3 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain