- linaro-toolchain - lists.linaro.org

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb-17-branchpoint-577-gbaeb632f1b7: 118 regressions on arm

by Guinevere Larsen

Hi Linaro folks! It seems that the system running the armv8l has a pretty old pascal compiler. I checked the log and it seems that, with that compiler version, using fpc -g will generate stabs information, rather than DWARF information. So in one sense, these regressions are expected, but more importantly, you should take a look at updating the armv8l machine so that pascal tests can continue working On 10/23/25 10:42 AM, 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 gdb_check master-arm, after: > | commit gdb-17-branchpoint-577-gbaeb632f1b7 > | Author: Guinevere Larsen <guinevere(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Wed Jan 22 14:05:01 2025 -0300 > | > | gdb: Remove stabs support from ELF files > | > | This commit makes it so that GDB won't read stabs information from ELF > | files. If stabs is detected in an ELF file, the reader now warns the user > | that stabs is not supported. > | ... 6 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 118 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gdb:gdb.pascal/case-insensitive-symbols.exp ... > | FAIL: gdb.pascal/case-insensitive-symbols.exp: gdb_breakpoint: set breakpoint at case-insensitive-symbols.pas:43 > | Running gdb:gdb.pascal/floats.exp ... > | FAIL: gdb.pascal/floats.exp: Going to second breakpoint (the program is no longer running) > | FAIL: gdb.pascal/floats.exp: Test sin(pi) is equal to 0 > | ... and 119 more > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gdb_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-1715. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3112/artifact/ar… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3112/artifact/ar… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3112/artifact/ar… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3112/artifact/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/3111/artifact/ar… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gdb/s… > > Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=baeb632f1b7ce… -- Cheers, Guinevere Larsen It/she

3 days, 21 hours

2
1
0 0

[PATCH] aarch64: streaming_mode_1.c: Remove dg-error

by H.J. Lu

On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 12:07 PM <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: > | commit gcc-16-4667-gdcf69bdcd49 > | Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools(a)gmail.com> > | Date: Sun Oct 26 08:42:20 2025 +0800 > | > | c: Try the type with the previous function attributes > | > | When there are 2 conflicting function declarations, try the new type > | with the previous TYPE_ATTRIBUTES if the current declaration has no > | TYPE_ATTRIBUTES to support > | ... 44 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 19 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/aarch64/sme/aarch64-sme.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sme/streaming_mode_1.c (test for errors, line 10) > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sme/streaming_mode_1.c (test for errors, line 121) > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sme/streaming_mode_1.c (test for errors, line 16) > | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sme/streaming_mode_1.c (test for errors, line 30) > | ... and 15 more > After commit dcf69bdcd49bccd901bfb01db7c15530e9a70dc0 Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools(a)gmail.com> Date: Sun Oct 26 08:42:20 2025 +0800 c: Try the type with the previous function attributes gcc no longer issues an error for: void sc_c () [[arm::streaming_compatible]]; void sc_c () {} Instead, the previous type attributes are applied to the current function definition. The resulting function definition is compatible with the previous declaration. PR c/122427 * gcc.target/aarch64/sme/streaming_mode_1.c: Remove dg-error. -- H.J.

3 days, 23 hours

2
3
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-4709-gc55c1de3a9a: 3 regressions on aarch64

by Jonathan Wakely

On Wed, 29 Oct 2025 at 22:04, <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: > | commit gcc-16-4709-gc55c1de3a9a > | Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Tue Oct 28 12:15:52 2025 +0000 > | > | libstdc++: Simplify std::regex_traits::value > | > | We don't need to use an istringstream to convert a hex digit to its > | numerical value. And if we don't use istringstream there, we don't need > | to include <sstream> in <regex>. > | ... 8 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 3 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running g++:g++.dg/dg.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C -std=gnu++11 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C -std=gnu++17 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: g++.dg/warn/uninit-pr105562.C -std=gnu++26 (test for excess errors) > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gcc_check master-aarch64 > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1735. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > If you have any questions regarding this report, please ask on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list. Fixed at r16-4714-gcc78f8523832d6 > > -----------------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-build/4300/artifac… > 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-build/4300/artifac… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/4300/artifac… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/4300/artifac… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-aarch64-build/4299/artifac… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/s… > > Full commit : See in git+ssh://linaroci@gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git

4 days, 1 hour

1
0
0 0

gcc-16-4069-ge77daa57300

by Paul Richard Thomas

The commit causing this regression was reverted three days later with r16-4111-g25f7f04e447dc0d2ed4c392eb21765e9ae9067d1 . Regards Paul

4 days, 4 hours

2
1
0 0

How the NI CLAD Certification Boosts Your Career in Engineering and Automation

by David Gibbs

Earning the NI Certified LabVIEW Associate Developer (CLAD) certification is a practical step for engineers and automation professionals aiming to prove hands-on LabVIEW competence. Employers value the problem-solving and system-design skills demonstrated by candidates who pass NI Certified LabVIEW Associate Developer CLAD Exam Questions, because the credential signals consistent coding practices and real-world application ability. The CLAD credential accelerates career growth by opening roles in test engineering, instrumentation, robotics, and industrial automation. With a firm foundation in graphical programming, certified professionals can contribute to project efficiency, reduce development time, and improve system reliability. Preparing with focused resources for NI Certified LabVIEW Associate Developer CLAD Exam Questions helps candidates master core topics such as dataflow, debugging, and modular design—skills directly transferable to workplace challenges. I selected Certboosters because it provides structured study plans, realistic practice tests, and expert feedback to increase confidence and exam readiness; their materials are tailored to practical outcomes and mirror exam style while reinforcing applied LabVIEW techniques. In short, the NI CLAD certification strengthens résumés, accelerates promotions, and equips engineers with an industry-recognized proof of LabVIEW proficiency that employers seek in automation and control-system roles. Use the link below to check the practice test questions: https://www.certboosters.com/ni/path/clad

4 days, 11 hours

1
0
0 0

Fwd: ☠ Buildbot (LLVM Buildbot): flang-arm64-windows-msvc - failed build (failure) (main)

by Mehdi AMINI

Hi folks, I have a strong suspicion that this bot has an incremental build issue right now. Can someone trigger a clean build please? Thanks! Mehdi ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: <llvm.buildmaster(a)lab.llvm.org> Date: Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 12:51 AM Subject: ☠ Buildbot (LLVM Buildbot): flang-arm64-windows-msvc - failed build (failure) (main) To: Mehdi Amini <joker.eph(a)gmail.com> Cc: <llvm.buildmaster(a)lab.llvm.org> The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder flang-arm64-windows-msvc while building flang,mlir. Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/207/builds/9096 Worker for this Build: linaro-armv8-windows-msvc-01 Blamelist: Mehdi Amini <joker.eph(a)gmail.com> BUILD FAILED: failed build (failure) Step 5 (build-unified-tree) failure: build (failure) ... 359 | return {APFloat(*smt, value.real()), APFloat(*smt, value.imag())}; | ^ c:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.39.33519\include\complex(1315,5): note: 'complex' has been explicitly marked deprecated here 1315 | _DEPRECATE_NONFLOATING_COMPLEX | ^ c:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.39.33519\include\yvals_core.h(1450,7): note: expanded from macro '_DEPRECATE_NONFLOATING_COMPLEX' 1450 | [[deprecated("warning STL4037: " \ | ^ 1 warning generated. 84.583 [1719/10/276] Building CXX object tools/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/CMakeFiles/obj.MLIRMemRefDialect.dir/MemRefDialect.cpp.obj FAILED: tools/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/CMakeFiles/obj.MLIRMemRefDialect.dir/MemRefDialect.cpp.obj C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\shims\ccache.exe C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\llvm-arm64\current\bin\clang-cl.exe /nologo -TP -DGTEST_HAS_RTTI=0 -DUNICODE -D_CRT_NONSTDC_NO_DEPRECATE -D_CRT_NONSTDC_NO_WARNINGS -D_CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE -D_CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -D_HAS_EXCEPTIONS=0 -D_SCL_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE -D_SCL_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS -D_UNICODE -D__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS -D__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS -D__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/mlir/include -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/include -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/llvm/include /DWIN32 /D_WINDOWS /Zc:inline /Zc:__cplusplus /Oi /Brepro /bigobj /permissive- -Werr or=unguarded-availability-new /W4 -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-field-initializers -Wimplicit-fallthrough -Wcovered-switch-default -Wno-noexcept-type -Wnon-virtual-dtor -Wdelete-non-virtual-dtor -Wsuggest-override -Wstring-conversion -Wno-pass-failed -Wmisleading-indentation -Wctad-maybe-unsupported /Gw -Wundef -Werror=mismatched-tags -Werror=global-constructors /O2 /Ob2 -std:c++17 -MD /EHs-c- /GR- -UNDEBUG /showIncludes /Fotools/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/CMakeFiles/obj.MLIRMemRefDialect.dir/MemRefDialect.cpp.obj /Fdtools\mlir\lib\Dialect\MemRef\IR\CMakeFiles\obj.MLIRMemRefDialect.dir\ -c -- C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/MemRefDialect.cpp In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/MemRefDialect.cpp:9: In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/Conversion/ConvertToEmitC/ToEmitCInterface.h:14: In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/IR/OpDefinition.h:22: In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/IR/Dialect.h:17: In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/IR/OperationSupport.h:19: C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/IR/BuiltinAttributes.h(359,14): warning: 'complex' is deprecated: warning STL4037: The effect of instantiating the template std::complex for any type other than float, double, or long double is unspecified. You can define _SILENCE_NONFLOATING_COMPLEX_DEPRECATION_WARNING to suppress this warning. [-Wdeprecated-declarations] 359 | return {APFloat(*smt, value.real()), APFloat(*smt, value.imag())}; | ^ c:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.39.33519\include\complex(1315,5): note: 'complex' has been explicitly marked deprecated here 1315 | _DEPRECATE_NONFLOATING_COMPLEX | ^ c:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\2022\Community\VC\Tools\MSVC\14.39.33519\include\yvals_core.h(1450,7): note: expanded from macro '_DEPRECATE_NONFLOATING_COMPLEX' 1450 | [[deprecated("warning STL4037: " \ | ^ In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/lib/Dialect/MemRef/IR/MemRefDialect.cpp:12: In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/Dialect/MemRef/IR/MemRef.h:13: In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/Dialect/Arith/IR/Arith.h:17: In file included from C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/Interfaces/ControlFlowInterfaces.h:371: C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/mlir/include\mlir/Interfaces/ControlFlowInterfaces.h.inc(1118,84): error: no viable conversion from '::mlir::RegionSuccessor' to '::mlir::RegionBranchPoint' 1118 | return (llvm::cast<ConcreteOp>(tablegen_opaque_val)).getMutableSuccessorOperands(point); | ^~~~~ C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/mlir/include\mlir/Interfaces/ControlFlowInterfaces.h.inc(435,23): note: in instantiation of member function 'mlir::detail::RegionBranchTerminatorOpInterfaceInterfaceTraits::Model<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>::getMutableSuccessorOperands' requested here 435 | Model() : Concept{getMutableSuccessorOperands, getSuccessorRegions} {} | ^ C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/Support/InterfaceSupport.h(238,46): note: in instantiation of member function 'mlir::detail::RegionBranchTerminatorOpInterfaceInterfaceTraits::Model<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>::Model' requested here 238 | new (malloc(sizeof(InterfaceModel))) InterfaceModel(); | ^ C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/Support/InterfaceSupport.h(225,7): note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'mlir::detail::InterfaceMap::insertModel<mlir::detail::RegionBranchTerminatorOpInterfaceInterfaceTraits::Model<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>>' requested here 225 | insertModel<typename T::ModelT>(); | ^ C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/Support/InterfaceSupport.h(199,10): note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'mlir::detail::InterfaceMap::insertPotentialInterface<mlir::RegionBranchTerminatorOpInterface::Trait<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>>' requested here 199 | (map.insertPotentialInterface<Types>(), ...); | ^ C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/IR/OpDefinition.h(1877,43): note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'mlir::detail::InterfaceMap::get<mlir::OpTrait::ZeroRegions<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::ZeroResults<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::ZeroSuccessors<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::OneOperand<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::HasParent<mlir::memref::GenericAtomicRMWOp>::Impl<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::OpInvariants<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::ConditionallySpeculatable::Trait<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::AlwaysSpeculatableImplTrait<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::MemoryEffectOpInterface::Trait<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::IsTerminator<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::RegionBranchTerminatorOpInterface::Trait<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>, mlir::OpTrait::ReturnLike<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp>>' requested he re 1877 | return detail::InterfaceMap::template get<Traits<ConcreteType>...>(); | ^ C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/mlir/include\mlir/IR/OperationSupport.h(533,55): note: in instantiation of member function 'mlir::Op<mlir::memref::AtomicYieldOp, mlir::OpTrait::ZeroRegions, mlir::OpTrait::ZeroResults, mlir::OpTrait::ZeroSuccessors, mlir::OpTrait::OneOperand, mlir::OpTrait::HasParent<mlir::memref::GenericAtomicRMWOp>::Impl, mlir::OpTrait::OpInvariants, mlir::ConditionallySpeculatable::Trait, mlir::OpTrait::AlwaysSpeculatableImplTrait, mlir::MemoryEffectOpInterface::Trait, mlir::OpTrait::IsTerminator, mlir::RegionBranchTerminatorOpInterface::Trait, mlir::OpTrait::ReturnLike>::getInterfaceMap' requested here Sincerely, LLVM Buildbot

4 days, 13 hours

2
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] v6.17.3-130-g86f364ee5842: Failure on aarch64

by Nathan Chancellor

On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 05:01:16PM +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. > > In tcwg_kernel/llvm-master-aarch64-stable-allnoconfig, after: > | commit v6.17.3-130-g86f364ee5842 > | Author: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy(a)kernel.org> > | Date: Thu Sep 18 10:05:46 2025 +0200 > | > | kbuild: always create intermediate vmlinux.unstripped > | > | [ Upstream commit 0ce5139fd96e9d415d3faaef1c575e238f9bbd67 ] > | > | Generate the intermediate vmlinux.unstripped regardless of > | ... 14 lines of the commit log omitted. This is reproducible for me locally with: $ make -skj"$(nproc)" ARCH=arm64 CC=clang CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux-gnu- HOSTCC=clang LD=ld.lld clean allnoconfig all aarch64-linux-gnu-objcopy: vmlinux: file format not recognized ... This does not occur with llvm-objcopy via LLVM=1 nor does it happen with an all GNU setup. This feels like a bug in GNU objcopy though, as this is reproducible with: $ aarch64-linux-gnu-objcopy --set-section-flags .modinfo=noload vmlinux.unstripped vmlinux.objcopy $ file vmlinux.unstripped vmlinux.objcopy vmlinux.unstripped: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, BuildID[sha1]=18512f67dae70a7fae145b34514054a8b8b3c105, not stripped vmlinux.objcopy: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, BuildID[sha1]=18512f67dae70a7fae145b34514054a8b8b3c105, not stripped $ aarch64-linux-gnu-objcopy --remove-section=.modinfo -w --strip-unneeded-symbol='__mod_device_table__*' vmlinux.objcopy aarch64-linux-gnu-objcopy: vmlinux.objcopy: file format not recognized $ aarch64-linux-gnu-objcopy --version | head -1 GNU objcopy (GNU Binutils) 2.45.50.20251028 Cheers, Nathan

5 days, 1 hour

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.42.9000-284-g27effb3d50: 9 regressions on aarch64

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In master-aarch64, after: | commit glibc-2.42.9000-284-g27effb3d50 | Author: Yury Khrustalev <yury.khrustalev(a)arm.com> | Date: Thu Sep 25 15:54:36 2025 +0100 | | aarch64: clear ZA state of SME before clone and clone3 syscalls | | This change adds a call to the __arm_za_disable() function immediately | before the SVC instruction inside clone() and clone3() wrappers. It also | adds a macro for inline clone() used in fork() and adds the same call to | ... 129 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 9 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running gdb:gdb.threads/foll-fork-other-thread.exp ... | FAIL: gdb.threads/foll-fork-other-thread.exp: fork_func=fork: follow=child: target-non-stop=auto: non-stop=off: displaced-stepping=auto: bt | FAIL: gdb.threads/foll-fork-other-thread.exp: fork_func=fork: follow=child: target-non-stop=auto: non-stop=off: displaced-stepping=off: bt | FAIL: gdb.threads/foll-fork-other-thread.exp: fork_func=fork: follow=child: target-non-stop=auto: non-stop=off: displaced-stepping=on: bt | FAIL: gdb.threads/foll-fork-other-thread.exp: fork_func=fork: follow=child: target-non-stop=off: non-stop=off: displaced-stepping=auto: bt | ... and 5 more Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb master-aarch64 *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1706. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=27effb3d50424fb9634b…

5 days, 11 hours

4
6
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-4604-g8b9cd6490ce5: Failure on aarch64

by Sam James

This is now https://gcc.gnu.org/PR122456.

5 days, 13 hours

1
0
0 0

Modify Your Cathay Pacific Flight Date Fast with Expert Phone Support

by jhase.20＠inwagit.com

Modify Your Cathay Pacific Trip Date Quickly by Phone – Call 1-833-341-5261 If your travel plans have changed and you need to update your Cathay Pacific flight, don’t worry—it’s easier than you might think. The quickest and most efficient way to change your flight date is by calling Cathay Pacific directly. Just dial 1-833-341-5261 to speak with a live customer service agent who can help you make the necessary changes in minutes. Whether you need to move your departure date, adjust your return trip, or accommodate a schedule change, Cathay Pacific’ phone support gives you direct access to real-time flight availability, fare options, and expert guidance. This method helps avoid the delays and confusion that can sometimes happen with online systems. Why Choose Phone Support? Changing your flight online is possible in some cases, but it’s not always the most reliable option—especially if: • Your itinerary involves multiple passengers or segments • You’re dealing with a complex schedule change • You want to compare multiple date options or explore cheaper alternatives • You need help understanding applicable fees or policies By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can speak to a real person who will walk you through the process, offer tailored suggestions, and make sure your new flight details are confirmed on the spot. It's a smart move if you’re short on time or want to avoid the hassle of navigating the website or app on your own. Step-by-Step: How to Change Your Flight by Phone Follow these simple steps to reschedule your Cathay Pacific trip with ease: 1. Prepare Your Booking Details Before calling, make sure you have all the necessary information ready to streamline the process. This includes: • Your booking reference number (also called a record locator) • Full names of all passengers on the reservation • The original flight date(s) and times • Your preferred new travel date(s) and timeframes • Any alternate dates you’d be willing to consider • Your payment method, in case there are fees or fare differences Having these details on hand ensures you won’t waste time looking for information during the call, which makes the process faster and more efficient. 2. Call Cathay Pacific at 1-833-341-5261 Once you’re ready, dial 1-833-341-5261 to connect with an Cathay Pacific representative. This dedicated line is designed to assist with flight changes, so you’ll be directed to the right department quickly. Pro Tip: To reduce wait times, try calling early in the morning or later in the evening, when call volume tends to be lower. Avoid peak hours around lunchtime and early afternoon if possible. 3. Speak to a Live Agent Once connected, clearly explain that you’d like to change your flight date. Provide the agent with: • Your reservation number • Passenger names • Original flight details • Your new preferred travel dates The agent will check availability in real-time and let you know what options are open for your revised itinerary. They’ll also inform you about any change fees or fare differences and help you compare flights if necessary. If you’re flexible with your dates or times, let the agent know—they may be able to find a better deal or more convenient option for you. 4. Pay Any Applicable Fees or Fare Differences In some cases, you may be required to pay: • A change fee, depending on your fare class • The fare difference, if your new flight costs more than your original one Some fares—especially basic economy—may have stricter change policies, while more flexible tickets may allow free changes. The agent will walk you through your options and provide a total cost before finalizing the change. Once you confirm the new itinerary and accept any applicable charges, you’ll securely provide your payment information over the phone. The agent will process the transaction and send you a confirmation email with your updated flight details. Tips for a Smooth Flight Change Process To make your call even more efficient, keep these tips in mind: • Call During Off-Peak Hours: Avoid long wait times by calling early in the morning or later in the evening. • Be Flexible: If you’re open to different dates or times, it increases your chances of finding better options or lower fares. • Ask About Fee Waivers: In some situations, like weather-related disruptions or schedule changes, fees may be waived. • Record the Agent’s Name and Confirmation Number: It’s always a good idea to keep a record of who you spoke with and your updated itinerary. • Double-Check Your Email: Once the change is processed, verify that the new flight details were sent to your email and are correctly reflected in your Cathay Pacific account. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Are there change fees for all Cathay Pacific tickets? Not necessarily. Cathay Pacific has eliminated change fees on many domestic and short-haul international flights, especially for main cabin and premium cabin fares. However, basic economy tickets are usually non-changeable, and for certain international routes, change fees may still apply. Your phone agent will explain what applies to your specific fare. Yes. Cathay Pacific generally offers a 24-hour flexible booking policy, allowing you to change or cancel your flight within 24 hours of booking without penalty, as long as the booking was made at least 2 days before departure. What if I booked through a travel agency or third-party site? If you purchased your ticket through an online travel agency (like Expedia, Orbitz, or Priceline), or a physical travel agency, you may need to contact them directly for flight changes. Cathay Pacific customer service agents may not have access to modify third-party bookings. What happens if I miss my flight without calling? If you don’t notify the airline and simply miss your flight, your booking could be marked as a no-show. This often results in your entire itinerary being canceled with no refund or ability to change. If you know you won’t make your flight, call immediately to avoid penalties and preserve your options. Can I upgrade or downgrade when changing my flight? Yes, you can ask about available upgrades or changes in fare class when you reschedule. The agent can provide information on costs and availability for different seating classes, such as Main Cabin Extra, Premium Economy, Business, or First Class. Will my frequent flyer miles and status still apply after the change? Absolutely. As long as your updated itinerary is still with Cathay Pacific or its partner airlines, your Advantage miles and elite status benefits should still apply. Just double-check that your frequent flyer number is still attached to the new reservation. In Summary Changing your Cathay Pacific flight doesn’t have to be stressful or complicated. By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can get personalized assistance from a live agent who will walk you through the process and help you find the best new flight options. With real-time availability, secure payment processing, and helpful advice, phone support is one of the most effective ways to make changes quickly and confidently. So, if your plans have changed and you need to update your trip, don’t delay. Call Cathay Pacific today and modify your flight in just a few easy steps. The faster you act, the more options you’ll have—and the smoother your travel experience will be. 📞 Call Now: 1-833-341-5261 for Fast, Friendly Assistance

6 days, 14 hours

1
0
0 0

Phone Guide to Effortlessly Change Your Hawaiian Airlines Flight Date

by jhase.20＠inwagit.com

Modify Your Hawaiian Airlines Trip Date Quickly by Phone – Call 1-833-341-5261 If your travel plans have changed and you need to update your Hawaiian Airlines flight, don’t worry—it’s easier than you might think. The quickest and most efficient way to change your flight date is by calling Hawaiian Airlines directly. Just dial 1-833-341-5261 to speak with a live customer service agent who can help you make the necessary changes in minutes. Whether you need to move your departure date, adjust your return trip, or accommodate a schedule change, Hawaiian Airlines’ phone support gives you direct access to real-time flight availability, fare options, and expert guidance. This method helps avoid the delays and confusion that can sometimes happen with online systems. Why Choose Phone Support? Changing your flight online is possible in some cases, but it’s not always the most reliable option—especially if: • Your itinerary involves multiple passengers or segments • You’re dealing with a complex schedule change • You want to compare multiple date options or explore cheaper alternatives • You need help understanding applicable fees or policies By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can speak to a real person who will walk you through the process, offer tailored suggestions, and make sure your new flight details are confirmed on the spot. It's a smart move if you’re short on time or want to avoid the hassle of navigating the website or app on your own. Step-by-Step: How to Change Your Flight by Phone Follow these simple steps to reschedule your Hawaiian Airlines trip with ease: 1. Prepare Your Booking Details Before calling, make sure you have all the necessary information ready to streamline the process. This includes: • Your booking reference number (also called a record locator) • Full names of all passengers on the reservation • The original flight date(s) and times • Your preferred new travel date(s) and timeframes • Any alternate dates you’d be willing to consider • Your payment method, in case there are fees or fare differences Having these details on hand ensures you won’t waste time looking for information during the call, which makes the process faster and more efficient. 2. Call Hawaiian Airlines at 1-833-341-5261 Once you’re ready, dial 1-833-341-5261 to connect with an Hawaiian Airlines representative. This dedicated line is designed to assist with flight changes, so you’ll be directed to the right department quickly. Pro Tip: To reduce wait times, try calling early in the morning or later in the evening, when call volume tends to be lower. Avoid peak hours around lunchtime and early afternoon if possible. 3. Speak to a Live Agent Once connected, clearly explain that you’d like to change your flight date. Provide the agent with: • Your reservation number • Passenger names • Original flight details • Your new preferred travel dates The agent will check availability in real-time and let you know what options are open for your revised itinerary. They’ll also inform you about any change fees or fare differences and help you compare flights if necessary. If you’re flexible with your dates or times, let the agent know—they may be able to find a better deal or more convenient option for you. 4. Pay Any Applicable Fees or Fare Differences In some cases, you may be required to pay: • A change fee, depending on your fare class • The fare difference, if your new flight costs more than your original one Some fares—especially basic economy—may have stricter change policies, while more flexible tickets may allow free changes. The agent will walk you through your options and provide a total cost before finalizing the change. Once you confirm the new itinerary and accept any applicable charges, you’ll securely provide your payment information over the phone. The agent will process the transaction and send you a confirmation email with your updated flight details. Tips for a Smooth Flight Change Process To make your call even more efficient, keep these tips in mind: • Call During Off-Peak Hours: Avoid long wait times by calling early in the morning or later in the evening. • Be Flexible: If you’re open to different dates or times, it increases your chances of finding better options or lower fares. • Ask About Fee Waivers: In some situations, like weather-related disruptions or schedule changes, fees may be waived. • Record the Agent’s Name and Confirmation Number: It’s always a good idea to keep a record of who you spoke with and your updated itinerary. • Double-Check Your Email: Once the change is processed, verify that the new flight details were sent to your email and are correctly reflected in your Hawaiian Airlines account. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Are there change fees for all Hawaiian Airlines tickets? Not necessarily. Hawaiian Airlines has eliminated change fees on many domestic and short-haul international flights, especially for main cabin and premium cabin fares. However, basic economy tickets are usually non-changeable, and for certain international routes, change fees may still apply. Your phone agent will explain what applies to your specific fare. Yes. Hawaiian Airlines generally offers a 24-hour flexible booking policy, allowing you to change or cancel your flight within 24 hours of booking without penalty, as long as the booking was made at least 2 days before departure. What if I booked through a travel agency or third-party site? If you purchased your ticket through an online travel agency (like Expedia, Orbitz, or Priceline), or a physical travel agency, you may need to contact them directly for flight changes. Hawaiian Airlines customer service agents may not have access to modify third-party bookings. What happens if I miss my flight without calling? If you don’t notify the airline and simply miss your flight, your booking could be marked as a no-show. This often results in your entire itinerary being canceled with no refund or ability to change. If you know you won’t make your flight, call immediately to avoid penalties and preserve your options. Can I upgrade or downgrade when changing my flight? Yes, you can ask about available upgrades or changes in fare class when you reschedule. The agent can provide information on costs and availability for different seating classes, such as Main Cabin Extra, Premium Economy, Business, or First Class. Will my frequent flyer miles and status still apply after the change? Absolutely. As long as your updated itinerary is still with Hawaiian Airlines or its partner airlines, your Advantage miles and elite status benefits should still apply. Just double-check that your frequent flyer number is still attached to the new reservation. In Summary Changing your Hawaiian Airlines flight doesn’t have to be stressful or complicated. By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can get personalized assistance from a live agent who will walk you through the process and help you find the best new flight options. With real-time availability, secure payment processing, and helpful advice, phone support is one of the most effective ways to make changes quickly and confidently. So, if your plans have changed and you need to update your trip, don’t delay. Call Hawaiian Airlines today and modify your flight in just a few easy steps. The faster you act, the more options you’ll have—and the smoother your travel experience will be. 📞 Call Now: 1-833-341-5261 for Fast, Friendly Assistance

6 days, 15 hours

1
0
0 0

EVA Air Talk to a Live Agent for Fast EVA Air Flight Rescheduling

by jhase.20＠inwagit.com

Modify Your EVA Air Trip Date Quickly by Phone – Call 1-833-341-5261 If your travel plans have changed and you need to update your EVA Air flight, don’t worry—it’s easier than you might think. The quickest and most efficient way to change your flight date is by calling EVA Air directly. Just dial 1-833-341-5261 to speak with a live customer service agent who can help you make the necessary changes in minutes. Whether you need to move your departure date, adjust your return trip, or accommodate a schedule change, EVA Air’ phone support gives you direct access to real-time flight availability, fare options, and expert guidance. This method helps avoid the delays and confusion that can sometimes happen with online systems. Why Choose Phone Support? Changing your flight online is possible in some cases, but it’s not always the most reliable option—especially if: • Your itinerary involves multiple passengers or segments • You’re dealing with a complex schedule change • You want to compare multiple date options or explore cheaper alternatives • You need help understanding applicable fees or policies By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can speak to a real person who will walk you through the process, offer tailored suggestions, and make sure your new flight details are confirmed on the spot. It's a smart move if you’re short on time or want to avoid the hassle of navigating the website or app on your own. Step-by-Step: How to Change Your Flight by Phone Follow these simple steps to reschedule your EVA Air trip with ease: 1. Prepare Your Booking Details Before calling, make sure you have all the necessary information ready to streamline the process. This includes: • Your booking reference number (also called a record locator) • Full names of all passengers on the reservation • The original flight date(s) and times • Your preferred new travel date(s) and timeframes • Any alternate dates you’d be willing to consider • Your payment method, in case there are fees or fare differences Having these details on hand ensures you won’t waste time looking for information during the call, which makes the process faster and more efficient. 2. Call EVA Air at 1-833-341-5261 Once you’re ready, dial 1-833-341-5261 to connect with an EVA Air representative. This dedicated line is designed to assist with flight changes, so you’ll be directed to the right department quickly. Pro Tip: To reduce wait times, try calling early in the morning or later in the evening, when call volume tends to be lower. Avoid peak hours around lunchtime and early afternoon if possible. 3. Speak to a Live Agent Once connected, clearly explain that you’d like to change your flight date. Provide the agent with: • Your reservation number • Passenger names • Original flight details • Your new preferred travel dates The agent will check availability in real-time and let you know what options are open for your revised itinerary. They’ll also inform you about any change fees or fare differences and help you compare flights if necessary. If you’re flexible with your dates or times, let the agent know—they may be able to find a better deal or more convenient option for you. 4. Pay Any Applicable Fees or Fare Differences In some cases, you may be required to pay: • A change fee, depending on your fare class • The fare difference, if your new flight costs more than your original one Some fares—especially basic economy—may have stricter change policies, while more flexible tickets may allow free changes. The agent will walk you through your options and provide a total cost before finalizing the change. Once you confirm the new itinerary and accept any applicable charges, you’ll securely provide your payment information over the phone. The agent will process the transaction and send you a confirmation email with your updated flight details. Tips for a Smooth Flight Change Process To make your call even more efficient, keep these tips in mind: • Call During Off-Peak Hours: Avoid long wait times by calling early in the morning or later in the evening. • Be Flexible: If you’re open to different dates or times, it increases your chances of finding better options or lower fares. • Ask About Fee Waivers: In some situations, like weather-related disruptions or schedule changes, fees may be waived. • Record the Agent’s Name and Confirmation Number: It’s always a good idea to keep a record of who you spoke with and your updated itinerary. • Double-Check Your Email: Once the change is processed, verify that the new flight details were sent to your email and are correctly reflected in your EVA Air account. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Are there change fees for all EVA Air tickets? Not necessarily. EVA Air has eliminated change fees on many domestic and short-haul international flights, especially for main cabin and premium cabin fares. However, basic economy tickets are usually non-changeable, and for certain international routes, change fees may still apply. Your phone agent will explain what applies to your specific fare. Yes. EVA Air generally offers a 24-hour flexible booking policy, allowing you to change or cancel your flight within 24 hours of booking without penalty, as long as the booking was made at least 2 days before departure. What if I booked through a travel agency or third-party site? If you purchased your ticket through an online travel agency (like Expedia, Orbitz, or Priceline), or a physical travel agency, you may need to contact them directly for flight changes. EVA Air customer service agents may not have access to modify third-party bookings. What happens if I miss my flight without calling? If you don’t notify the airline and simply miss your flight, your booking could be marked as a no-show. This often results in your entire itinerary being canceled with no refund or ability to change. If you know you won’t make your flight, call immediately to avoid penalties and preserve your options. Can I upgrade or downgrade when changing my flight? Yes, you can ask about available upgrades or changes in fare class when you reschedule. The agent can provide information on costs and availability for different seating classes, such as Main Cabin Extra, Premium Economy, Business, or First Class. Will my frequent flyer miles and status still apply after the change? Absolutely. As long as your updated itinerary is still with EVA Air or its partner airlines, your Advantage miles and elite status benefits should still apply. Just double-check that your frequent flyer number is still attached to the new reservation. In Summary Changing your EVA Air flight doesn’t have to be stressful or complicated. By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can get personalized assistance from a live agent who will walk you through the process and help you find the best new flight options. With real-time availability, secure payment processing, and helpful advice, phone support is one of the most effective ways to make changes quickly and confidently. So, if your plans have changed and you need to update your trip, don’t delay. Call EVA Air today and modify your flight in just a few easy steps. The faster you act, the more options you’ll have—and the smoother your travel experience will be. 📞 Call Now: 1-833-341-5261 for Fast, Friendly Assistance

6 days, 15 hours

1
0
0 0

Simple Phone Instructions to Update Your British Airways Trip Date

by jhase.20＠inwagit.com

Modify Your British Airways Trip Date Quickly by Phone – Call 1-833-341-5261 If your travel plans have changed and you need to update your British Airways flight, don’t worry—it’s easier than you might think. The quickest and most efficient way to change your flight date is by calling British Airways directly. Just dial 1-833-341-5261 to speak with a live customer service agent who can help you make the necessary changes in minutes. Whether you need to move your departure date, adjust your return trip, or accommodate a schedule change, British Airways’ phone support gives you direct access to real-time flight availability, fare options, and expert guidance. This method helps avoid the delays and confusion that can sometimes happen with online systems. Why Choose Phone Support? Changing your flight online is possible in some cases, but it’s not always the most reliable option—especially if: • Your itinerary involves multiple passengers or segments • You’re dealing with a complex schedule change • You want to compare multiple date options or explore cheaper alternatives • You need help understanding applicable fees or policies By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can speak to a real person who will walk you through the process, offer tailored suggestions, and make sure your new flight details are confirmed on the spot. It's a smart move if you’re short on time or want to avoid the hassle of navigating the website or app on your own. Step-by-Step: How to Change Your Flight by Phone Follow these simple steps to reschedule your British Airways trip with ease: 1. Prepare Your Booking Details Before calling, make sure you have all the necessary information ready to streamline the process. This includes: • Your booking reference number (also called a record locator) • Full names of all passengers on the reservation • The original flight date(s) and times • Your preferred new travel date(s) and timeframes • Any alternate dates you’d be willing to consider • Your payment method, in case there are fees or fare differences Having these details on hand ensures you won’t waste time looking for information during the call, which makes the process faster and more efficient. 2. Call British Airways at 1-833-341-5261 Once you’re ready, dial 1-833-341-5261 to connect with an British Airways representative. This dedicated line is designed to assist with flight changes, so you’ll be directed to the right department quickly. Pro Tip: To reduce wait times, try calling early in the morning or later in the evening, when call volume tends to be lower. Avoid peak hours around lunchtime and early afternoon if possible. 3. Speak to a Live Agent Once connected, clearly explain that you’d like to change your flight date. Provide the agent with: • Your reservation number • Passenger names • Original flight details • Your new preferred travel dates The agent will check availability in real-time and let you know what options are open for your revised itinerary. They’ll also inform you about any change fees or fare differences and help you compare flights if necessary. If you’re flexible with your dates or times, let the agent know—they may be able to find a better deal or more convenient option for you. 4. Pay Any Applicable Fees or Fare Differences In some cases, you may be required to pay: • A change fee, depending on your fare class • The fare difference, if your new flight costs more than your original one Some fares—especially basic economy—may have stricter change policies, while more flexible tickets may allow free changes. The agent will walk you through your options and provide a total cost before finalizing the change. Once you confirm the new itinerary and accept any applicable charges, you’ll securely provide your payment information over the phone. The agent will process the transaction and send you a confirmation email with your updated flight details. Tips for a Smooth Flight Change Process To make your call even more efficient, keep these tips in mind: • Call During Off-Peak Hours: Avoid long wait times by calling early in the morning or later in the evening. • Be Flexible: If you’re open to different dates or times, it increases your chances of finding better options or lower fares. • Ask About Fee Waivers: In some situations, like weather-related disruptions or schedule changes, fees may be waived. • Record the Agent’s Name and Confirmation Number: It’s always a good idea to keep a record of who you spoke with and your updated itinerary. • Double-Check Your Email: Once the change is processed, verify that the new flight details were sent to your email and are correctly reflected in your British Airways account. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Are there change fees for all British Airways tickets? Not necessarily. British Airways has eliminated change fees on many domestic and short-haul international flights, especially for main cabin and premium cabin fares. However, basic economy tickets are usually non-changeable, and for certain international routes, change fees may still apply. Your phone agent will explain what applies to your specific fare. Yes. British Airways generally offers a 24-hour flexible booking policy, allowing you to change or cancel your flight within 24 hours of booking without penalty, as long as the booking was made at least 2 days before departure. What if I booked through a travel agency or third-party site? If you purchased your ticket through an online travel agency (like Expedia, Orbitz, or Priceline), or a physical travel agency, you may need to contact them directly for flight changes. British Airways customer service agents may not have access to modify third-party bookings. What happens if I miss my flight without calling? If you don’t notify the airline and simply miss your flight, your booking could be marked as a no-show. This often results in your entire itinerary being canceled with no refund or ability to change. If you know you won’t make your flight, call immediately to avoid penalties and preserve your options. Can I upgrade or downgrade when changing my flight? Yes, you can ask about available upgrades or changes in fare class when you reschedule. The agent can provide information on costs and availability for different seating classes, such as Main Cabin Extra, Premium Economy, Business, or First Class. Will my frequent flyer miles and status still apply after the change? Absolutely. As long as your updated itinerary is still with British Airways or its partner airlines, your Advantage miles and elite status benefits should still apply. Just double-check that your frequent flyer number is still attached to the new reservation. In Summary Changing your British Airways flight doesn’t have to be stressful or complicated. By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can get personalized assistance from a live agent who will walk you through the process and help you find the best new flight options. With real-time availability, secure payment processing, and helpful advice, phone support is one of the most effective ways to make changes quickly and confidently. So, if your plans have changed and you need to update your trip, don’t delay. Call British Airways today and modify your flight in just a few easy steps. The faster you act, the more options you’ll have—and the smoother your travel experience will be. 📞 Call Now: 1-833-341-5261 for Fast, Friendly Assistance

6 days, 15 hours

1
0
0 0

Modify Your Avianca Airlines Flight Date Fast with Expert Phone Support

by jhase.20＠inwagit.com

Modify Your Avianca Airlines Trip Date Quickly by Phone – Call 1-833-341-5261 If your travel plans have changed and you need to update your Avianca Airlines flight, don’t worry—it’s easier than you might think. The quickest and most efficient way to change your flight date is by calling Avianca Airlines directly. Just dial 1-833-341-5261 to speak with a live customer service agent who can help you make the necessary changes in minutes. Whether you need to move your departure date, adjust your return trip, or accommodate a schedule change, Avianca Airlines’ phone support gives you direct access to real-time flight availability, fare options, and expert guidance. This method helps avoid the delays and confusion that can sometimes happen with online systems. Why Choose Phone Support? Changing your flight online is possible in some cases, but it’s not always the most reliable option—especially if: • Your itinerary involves multiple passengers or segments • You’re dealing with a complex schedule change • You want to compare multiple date options or explore cheaper alternatives • You need help understanding applicable fees or policies By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can speak to a real person who will walk you through the process, offer tailored suggestions, and make sure your new flight details are confirmed on the spot. It's a smart move if you’re short on time or want to avoid the hassle of navigating the website or app on your own. Step-by-Step: How to Change Your Flight by Phone Follow these simple steps to reschedule your Avianca Airlines trip with ease: 1. Prepare Your Booking Details Before calling, make sure you have all the necessary information ready to streamline the process. This includes: • Your booking reference number (also called a record locator) • Full names of all passengers on the reservation • The original flight date(s) and times • Your preferred new travel date(s) and timeframes • Any alternate dates you’d be willing to consider • Your payment method, in case there are fees or fare differences Having these details on hand ensures you won’t waste time looking for information during the call, which makes the process faster and more efficient. 2. Call Avianca Airlines at 1-833-341-5261 Once you’re ready, dial 1-833-341-5261 to connect with an Avianca Airlines representative. This dedicated line is designed to assist with flight changes, so you’ll be directed to the right department quickly. Pro Tip: To reduce wait times, try calling early in the morning or later in the evening, when call volume tends to be lower. Avoid peak hours around lunchtime and early afternoon if possible. 3. Speak to a Live Agent Once connected, clearly explain that you’d like to change your flight date. Provide the agent with: • Your reservation number • Passenger names • Original flight details • Your new preferred travel dates The agent will check availability in real-time and let you know what options are open for your revised itinerary. They’ll also inform you about any change fees or fare differences and help you compare flights if necessary. If you’re flexible with your dates or times, let the agent know—they may be able to find a better deal or more convenient option for you. 4. Pay Any Applicable Fees or Fare Differences In some cases, you may be required to pay: • A change fee, depending on your fare class • The fare difference, if your new flight costs more than your original one Some fares—especially basic economy—may have stricter change policies, while more flexible tickets may allow free changes. The agent will walk you through your options and provide a total cost before finalizing the change. Once you confirm the new itinerary and accept any applicable charges, you’ll securely provide your payment information over the phone. The agent will process the transaction and send you a confirmation email with your updated flight details. Tips for a Smooth Flight Change Process To make your call even more efficient, keep these tips in mind: • Call During Off-Peak Hours: Avoid long wait times by calling early in the morning or later in the evening. • Be Flexible: If you’re open to different dates or times, it increases your chances of finding better options or lower fares. • Ask About Fee Waivers: In some situations, like weather-related disruptions or schedule changes, fees may be waived. • Record the Agent’s Name and Confirmation Number: It’s always a good idea to keep a record of who you spoke with and your updated itinerary. • Double-Check Your Email: Once the change is processed, verify that the new flight details were sent to your email and are correctly reflected in your Avianca Airlines account. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Are there change fees for all Avianca Airlines tickets? Not necessarily. Avianca Airlines has eliminated change fees on many domestic and short-haul international flights, especially for main cabin and premium cabin fares. However, basic economy tickets are usually non-changeable, and for certain international routes, change fees may still apply. Your phone agent will explain what applies to your specific fare. Yes. Avianca Airlines generally offers a 24-hour flexible booking policy, allowing you to change or cancel your flight within 24 hours of booking without penalty, as long as the booking was made at least 2 days before departure. What if I booked through a travel agency or third-party site? If you purchased your ticket through an online travel agency (like Expedia, Orbitz, or Priceline), or a physical travel agency, you may need to contact them directly for flight changes. Avianca Airlines customer service agents may not have access to modify third-party bookings. What happens if I miss my flight without calling? If you don’t notify the airline and simply miss your flight, your booking could be marked as a no-show. This often results in your entire itinerary being canceled with no refund or ability to change. If you know you won’t make your flight, call immediately to avoid penalties and preserve your options. Can I upgrade or downgrade when changing my flight? Yes, you can ask about available upgrades or changes in fare class when you reschedule. The agent can provide information on costs and availability for different seating classes, such as Main Cabin Extra, Premium Economy, Business, or First Class. Will my frequent flyer miles and status still apply after the change? Absolutely. As long as your updated itinerary is still with Avianca Airlines or its partner airlines, your Advantage miles and elite status benefits should still apply. Just double-check that your frequent flyer number is still attached to the new reservation. In Summary Changing your Avianca Airlines flight doesn’t have to be stressful or complicated. By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can get personalized assistance from a live agent who will walk you through the process and help you find the best new flight options. With real-time availability, secure payment processing, and helpful advice, phone support is one of the most effective ways to make changes quickly and confidently. So, if your plans have changed and you need to update your trip, don’t delay. Call Avianca Airlines today and modify your flight in just a few easy steps. The faster you act, the more options you’ll have—and the smoother your travel experience will be. 📞 Call Now: 1-833-341-5261 for Fast, Friendly Assistance

6 days, 15 hours

1
0
0 0

Japan Airlines Simple Phone Instructions to Update Your Japan Airlines Trip Date

by jhase.20＠inwagit.com

Modify Your Japan Airlines Trip Date Quickly by Phone – Call 1-833-341-5261 If your travel plans have changed and you need to update your Japan Airlines flight, don’t worry—it’s easier than you might think. The quickest and most efficient way to change your flight date is by calling Japan Airlines directly. Just dial 1-833-341-5261 to speak with a live customer service agent who can help you make the necessary changes in minutes. Whether you need to move your departure date, adjust your return trip, or accommodate a schedule change, Japan Airlines’ phone support gives you direct access to real-time flight availability, fare options, and expert guidance. This method helps avoid the delays and confusion that can sometimes happen with online systems. Why Choose Phone Support? Changing your flight online is possible in some cases, but it’s not always the most reliable option—especially if: • Your itinerary involves multiple passengers or segments • You’re dealing with a complex schedule change • You want to compare multiple date options or explore cheaper alternatives • You need help understanding applicable fees or policies By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can speak to a real person who will walk you through the process, offer tailored suggestions, and make sure your new flight details are confirmed on the spot. It's a smart move if you’re short on time or want to avoid the hassle of navigating the website or app on your own. Step-by-Step: How to Change Your Flight by Phone Follow these simple steps to reschedule your Japan Airlines trip with ease: 1. Prepare Your Booking Details Before calling, make sure you have all the necessary information ready to streamline the process. This includes: • Your booking reference number (also called a record locator) • Full names of all passengers on the reservation • The original flight date(s) and times • Your preferred new travel date(s) and timeframes • Any alternate dates you’d be willing to consider • Your payment method, in case there are fees or fare differences Having these details on hand ensures you won’t waste time looking for information during the call, which makes the process faster and more efficient. 2. Call Japan Airlines at 1-833-341-5261 Once you’re ready, dial 1-833-341-5261 to connect with an Japan Airlines representative. This dedicated line is designed to assist with flight changes, so you’ll be directed to the right department quickly. Pro Tip: To reduce wait times, try calling early in the morning or later in the evening, when call volume tends to be lower. Avoid peak hours around lunchtime and early afternoon if possible. 3. Speak to a Live Agent Once connected, clearly explain that you’d like to change your flight date. Provide the agent with: • Your reservation number • Passenger names • Original flight details • Your new preferred travel dates The agent will check availability in real-time and let you know what options are open for your revised itinerary. They’ll also inform you about any change fees or fare differences and help you compare flights if necessary. If you’re flexible with your dates or times, let the agent know—they may be able to find a better deal or more convenient option for you. 4. Pay Any Applicable Fees or Fare Differences In some cases, you may be required to pay: • A change fee, depending on your fare class • The fare difference, if your new flight costs more than your original one Some fares—especially basic economy—may have stricter change policies, while more flexible tickets may allow free changes. The agent will walk you through your options and provide a total cost before finalizing the change. Once you confirm the new itinerary and accept any applicable charges, you’ll securely provide your payment information over the phone. The agent will process the transaction and send you a confirmation email with your updated flight details. Tips for a Smooth Flight Change Process To make your call even more efficient, keep these tips in mind: • Call During Off-Peak Hours: Avoid long wait times by calling early in the morning or later in the evening. • Be Flexible: If you’re open to different dates or times, it increases your chances of finding better options or lower fares. • Ask About Fee Waivers: In some situations, like weather-related disruptions or schedule changes, fees may be waived. • Record the Agent’s Name and Confirmation Number: It’s always a good idea to keep a record of who you spoke with and your updated itinerary. • Double-Check Your Email: Once the change is processed, verify that the new flight details were sent to your email and are correctly reflected in your Japan Airlines account. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Are there change fees for all Japan Airlines tickets? Not necessarily. Japan Airlines has eliminated change fees on many domestic and short-haul international flights, especially for main cabin and premium cabin fares. However, basic economy tickets are usually non-changeable, and for certain international routes, change fees may still apply. Your phone agent will explain what applies to your specific fare. Yes. Japan Airlines generally offers a 24-hour flexible booking policy, allowing you to change or cancel your flight within 24 hours of booking without penalty, as long as the booking was made at least 2 days before departure. What if I booked through a travel agency or third-party site? If you purchased your ticket through an online travel agency (like Expedia, Orbitz, or Priceline), or a physical travel agency, you may need to contact them directly for flight changes. Japan Airlines customer service agents may not have access to modify third-party bookings. What happens if I miss my flight without calling? If you don’t notify the airline and simply miss your flight, your booking could be marked as a no-show. This often results in your entire itinerary being canceled with no refund or ability to change. If you know you won’t make your flight, call immediately to avoid penalties and preserve your options. Can I upgrade or downgrade when changing my flight? Yes, you can ask about available upgrades or changes in fare class when you reschedule. The agent can provide information on costs and availability for different seating classes, such as Main Cabin Extra, Premium Economy, Business, or First Class. Will my frequent flyer miles and status still apply after the change? Absolutely. As long as your updated itinerary is still with Japan Airlines or its partner airlines, your Advantage miles and elite status benefits should still apply. Just double-check that your frequent flyer number is still attached to the new reservation. In Summary Changing your Japan Airlines flight doesn’t have to be stressful or complicated. By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can get personalized assistance from a live agent who will walk you through the process and help you find the best new flight options. With real-time availability, secure payment processing, and helpful advice, phone support is one of the most effective ways to make changes quickly and confidently. So, if your plans have changed and you need to update your trip, don’t delay. Call Japan Airlines today and modify your flight in just a few easy steps. The faster you act, the more options you’ll have—and the smoother your travel experience will be. 📞 Call Now: 1-833-341-5261 for Fast, Friendly Assistance

6 days, 15 hours

1
0
0 0

Hassle-Free Singapore Airlines Date Change – Just a Phone Call Away

by jhase.20＠inwagit.com

Modify Your Singapore Airlines Trip Date Quickly by Phone – Call 1-833-341-5261 If your travel plans have changed and you need to update your Singapore Airlines flight, don’t worry—it’s easier than you might think. The quickest and most efficient way to change your flight date is by calling Singapore Airlines directly. Just dial 1-833-341-5261 to speak with a live customer service agent who can help you make the necessary changes in minutes. Whether you need to move your departure date, adjust your return trip, or accommodate a schedule change, Singapore Airlines’ phone support gives you direct access to real-time flight availability, fare options, and expert guidance. This method helps avoid the delays and confusion that can sometimes happen with online systems. Why Choose Phone Support? Changing your flight online is possible in some cases, but it’s not always the most reliable option—especially if: • Your itinerary involves multiple passengers or segments • You’re dealing with a complex schedule change • You want to compare multiple date options or explore cheaper alternatives • You need help understanding applicable fees or policies By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can speak to a real person who will walk you through the process, offer tailored suggestions, and make sure your new flight details are confirmed on the spot. It's a smart move if you’re short on time or want to avoid the hassle of navigating the website or app on your own. Step-by-Step: How to Change Your Flight by Phone Follow these simple steps to reschedule your Singapore Airlines trip with ease: 1. Prepare Your Booking Details Before calling, make sure you have all the necessary information ready to streamline the process. This includes: • Your booking reference number (also called a record locator) • Full names of all passengers on the reservation • The original flight date(s) and times • Your preferred new travel date(s) and timeframes • Any alternate dates you’d be willing to consider • Your payment method, in case there are fees or fare differences Having these details on hand ensures you won’t waste time looking for information during the call, which makes the process faster and more efficient. 2. Call Singapore Airlines at 1-833-341-5261 Once you’re ready, dial 1-833-341-5261 to connect with an Singapore Airlines representative. This dedicated line is designed to assist with flight changes, so you’ll be directed to the right department quickly. Pro Tip: To reduce wait times, try calling early in the morning or later in the evening, when call volume tends to be lower. Avoid peak hours around lunchtime and early afternoon if possible. 3. Speak to a Live Agent Once connected, clearly explain that you’d like to change your flight date. Provide the agent with: • Your reservation number • Passenger names • Original flight details • Your new preferred travel dates The agent will check availability in real-time and let you know what options are open for your revised itinerary. They’ll also inform you about any change fees or fare differences and help you compare flights if necessary. If you’re flexible with your dates or times, let the agent know—they may be able to find a better deal or more convenient option for you. 4. Pay Any Applicable Fees or Fare Differences In some cases, you may be required to pay: • A change fee, depending on your fare class • The fare difference, if your new flight costs more than your original one Some fares—especially basic economy—may have stricter change policies, while more flexible tickets may allow free changes. The agent will walk you through your options and provide a total cost before finalizing the change. Once you confirm the new itinerary and accept any applicable charges, you’ll securely provide your payment information over the phone. The agent will process the transaction and send you a confirmation email with your updated flight details. Tips for a Smooth Flight Change Process To make your call even more efficient, keep these tips in mind: • Call During Off-Peak Hours: Avoid long wait times by calling early in the morning or later in the evening. • Be Flexible: If you’re open to different dates or times, it increases your chances of finding better options or lower fares. • Ask About Fee Waivers: In some situations, like weather-related disruptions or schedule changes, fees may be waived. • Record the Agent’s Name and Confirmation Number: It’s always a good idea to keep a record of who you spoke with and your updated itinerary. • Double-Check Your Email: Once the change is processed, verify that the new flight details were sent to your email and are correctly reflected in your Singapore Airlines account. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Are there change fees for all Singapore Airlines tickets? Not necessarily. Singapore Airlines has eliminated change fees on many domestic and short-haul international flights, especially for main cabin and premium cabin fares. However, basic economy tickets are usually non-changeable, and for certain international routes, change fees may still apply. Your phone agent will explain what applies to your specific fare. Yes. Singapore Airlines generally offers a 24-hour flexible booking policy, allowing you to change or cancel your flight within 24 hours of booking without penalty, as long as the booking was made at least 2 days before departure. What if I booked through a travel agency or third-party site? If you purchased your ticket through an online travel agency (like Expedia, Orbitz, or Priceline), or a physical travel agency, you may need to contact them directly for flight changes. Singapore Airlines customer service agents may not have access to modify third-party bookings. What happens if I miss my flight without calling? If you don’t notify the airline and simply miss your flight, your booking could be marked as a no-show. This often results in your entire itinerary being canceled with no refund or ability to change. If you know you won’t make your flight, call immediately to avoid penalties and preserve your options. Can I upgrade or downgrade when changing my flight? Yes, you can ask about available upgrades or changes in fare class when you reschedule. The agent can provide information on costs and availability for different seating classes, such as Main Cabin Extra, Premium Economy, Business, or First Class. Will my frequent flyer miles and status still apply after the change? Absolutely. As long as your updated itinerary is still with Singapore Airlines or its partner airlines, your Advantage miles and elite status benefits should still apply. Just double-check that your frequent flyer number is still attached to the new reservation. In Summary Changing your Singapore Airlines flight doesn’t have to be stressful or complicated. By calling 1-833-341-5261, you can get personalized assistance from a live agent who will walk you through the process and help you find the best new flight options. With real-time availability, secure payment processing, and helpful advice, phone support is one of the most effective ways to make changes quickly and confidently. So, if your plans have changed and you need to update your trip, don’t delay. Call Singapore Airlines today and modify your flight in just a few easy steps. The faster you act, the more options you’ll have—and the smoother your travel experience will be. 📞 Call Now: 1-833-341-5261 for Fast, Friendly Assistance

6 days, 15 hours

1
0
0 0

How Business Analysts Drive Organizational Success and Innovation

by David Gibbs

Business analysts are the bridge between strategy and execution, turning data into decisions that drive organizational success and innovation. By gathering stakeholder requirements, analyzing processes, and prioritizing solutions, they reduce waste, improve customer experiences, and accelerate time-to-market. Their expertise in mapping workflows and identifying opportunities for automation enables teams to focus on high-impact work while minimizing risk. Leveraging structured methodologies and modern analytics, business analysts translate complex information into clear, actionable roadmaps. This fosters cross-functional collaboration, supports data-driven culture, and uncovers new revenue streams. When aligned with leadership, their insights guide product strategy, operational improvements, and digital transformation initiatives that keep organizations competitive. Preparing for certification strengthens these capabilities. The PeopleCert Business Analysis Exam Questions help candidates master core techniques, from requirements elicitation to stakeholder management, ensuring they can contribute measurable value from day one. Employers value certified analysts who demonstrate proficiency; practicing with PeopleCert Business Analysis Exam Questions signals readiness and commitment to continuous improvement. Why I choose Certboosters: it offers focused practice tests, clear explanations, and realistic exam simulators tailored to real-world scenarios, making it easier to retain knowledge and build confidence before taking your exam. Start practicing today to accelerate your impact, career growth, and professional credibility. Use the link below to check the practice test questions: https://www.certboosters.com/peoplecert/path/peoplecert-business-analysis

1 week, 3 days

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.42.9000-337-g1b657c53c21: 4 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. In glibc_check master-arm, after: | commit glibc-2.42.9000-337-g1b657c53c21 | Author: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh(a)sourceware.org> | Date: Fri Oct 10 20:21:13 2025 -0400 | | Simplify powl computation for small integral y [BZ #33411] | | The powl implementation for x86_64 ends up multiplying X once more than | necessary and then throwing away that result. This results in an | overflow flag being set in cases where there is no overflow. | ... 7 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 4 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running glibc:math ... | FAIL: math/test-double-pow | FAIL: math/test-float32x-pow | FAIL: math/test-float64-pow | FAIL: math/test-ldouble-pow Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_glibc_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-1714. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_glibc_check--master-arm-build/3176/artifact/… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/3176/artifact/… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/3176/artifact/… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/3176/artifact/… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/3173/artifact/… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=1b657c53c21a100082b0…

1 week, 3 days

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.42.9000-338-g324084649b2: Failure 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. In master-arm, after: | commit glibc-2.42.9000-338-g324084649b2 | Author: DJ Delorie <dj(a)redhat.com> | Date: Wed Oct 15 21:37:56 2025 -0400 | | sprof: check pread size and offset for overflow | | Add a bit of descriptive paranoia to the values we read from | the ELF headers and use to access data. | | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces Failure: | Results changed to | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe gcc: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 4 | # build_abe glibc: | # FAILED | # build_abe gdb: | # First few build errors in logs: | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zd’ expects argument of type ‘signed size_t’, but argument 5 has type ‘off_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zu’ expects argument of type ‘size_t’, but argument 6 has type ‘__off64_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zd’ expects argument of type ‘signed size_t’, but argument 5 has type ‘off_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zu’ expects argument of type ‘size_t’, but argument 6 has type ‘__off64_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zd’ expects argument of type ‘signed size_t’, but argument 5 has type ‘off_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zu’ expects argument of type ‘size_t’, but argument 6 has type ‘__off64_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zd’ expects argument of type ‘signed size_t’, but argument 5 has type ‘off_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zu’ expects argument of type ‘size_t’, but argument 6 has type ‘__off64_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zd’ expects argument of type ‘signed size_t’, but argument 5 has type ‘off_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | # 00:03:33 sprof.c:573:16: error: format ‘%zu’ expects argument of type ‘size_t’, but argument 6 has type ‘__off64_t’ {aka ‘long long int’} [-Werror=format=] | | From | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe gcc: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 4 | # build_abe glibc: | 5 | # build_abe gdb: | 6 Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_build 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-1709. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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 * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_build--master-arm-build/1226/arti… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_build--master-arm-build/1226/arti… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_build--master-arm-build/1226/arti… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_build--master-arm-build/1225/arti… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=324084649b2da2f6840e…

1 week, 4 days

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-11449-ga6181dc84b79: 3 regressions on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, These errors are probably caused by incorrect test programs. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the tests. I apologize for the false detection. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-11449-ga6181dc84b79 > | Author: Peter Klausler <pklausler(a)nvidia.com> > | Date: Thu Oct 16 12:20:53 2025 -0700 > | > | [flang] Refine checks for NULL() in expressions (#163655) > | > | Fix a false positive "NULL can't be an operand here" error message > | arising in a defined generic interface for an intrinsic operator (==) > | with multiple spellings. > | ... 2 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 3 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0573 ... > | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0573/Fujitsu-Fortran-0573_0001.test > | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0573/Fujitsu-Fortran-0573_0002.test > | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0573/Fujitsu-Fortran-0573_0009.test > | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu -DTEST_SUITE_FUJITSU_WITH_FAST_MATH=ON "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-2097. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a6181dc84b79dd368c7a43ef4f6f164…

1 week, 6 days

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-3093-gc7de7ddbfae: 1 regression on aarch64

by Andrew Pinski

On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 3:22 PM <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 master-aarch64, after: > | commit gcc-16-3093-gc7de7ddbfae > | Author: Andrew Pinski <quic_apinski(a)quicinc.com> > | Date: Sun Jun 8 10:51:02 2025 -0700 > | > | forwprop: Change optimize_agr_copyprop into forward walk instead > of backwards > | > | While thinking about how to implement the rest of the copy prop > and makes sure not > | to introduce some compile time problems, optimize_agr_copyprop > should be changed > | into a forwproping rather than looking backwards. > | ... 10 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running acats:chapter c4 ... > | FAIL: c41303a > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc master-aarch64 > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on > aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu > > We track this bug report under > https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1648. Please let us know if you > have a fix. > I filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121494 and will be looking into later tonight or tomorrow. It also happens on s390x which gives me a hint of where to start to try to reproduce it on x86_64. Thanks, Andrew > > 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_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/2… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and > make commands are in > * > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/2… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/2… > > Current build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/2… > Reference build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/2… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : > https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/sha1… > > Full commit : See in git+ssh://linaroci@gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git

1 month, 2 weeks

2
2
0 0

Fwd: [llvm/llvm-project] [mlir][llvm] Add intrinsic arg and result attribute support (PR #150783)

by Tobias Gysi

Dear Linaro Team, I am looking for advice on how to reproduce a flang-arm64-windows-msvc LLVM build bot failure. I hope I ended up in the right place here. I had to revert a PR (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150783) that broke the flang-arm64-windows-msvc LLVM build bot in the morning 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 build bot failures and since I was not able to reproduce the problem locally, I wonder if there is a way to run the build bot on my reland PR? Alternatively, hints on how to reproduce the problem locally on a x86 Linux machine would be appreciated. Best, Tobias ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: LLVM Continuous Integration <notifications(a)github.com> Date: Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 9:58 AM Subject: Re: [llvm/llvm-project] [mlir][llvm] Add intrinsic arg and result attribute support (PR #150783) To: llvm/llvm-project <llvm-project(a)noreply.github.com> Cc: Tobias Gysi <tobias.gysi(a)nextsilicon.com>, State change < state_change(a)noreply.github.com> *llvm-ci* left a comment (llvm/llvm-project#150783) <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150783#issuecomment-3131154498> LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder flang-arm64-windows-msvc running on linaro-armv8-windows-msvc-01 while building mlir at step 6 "test-build-unified-tree-check-mlir". Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/207/builds/4441 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference Step 6 (test-build-unified-tree-check-mlir) failure: test (failure) ******************** TEST 'MLIR :: Dialect/Bufferization/Transforms/one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir' FAILED ******************** Exit Code: 1 Command Output (stdout): -- # RUN: at line 1 c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\mlir-opt.exe C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\mlir\test\Dialect\Bufferization\Transforms\one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir -one-shot-bufferize="bufferize-function-boundaries test-analysis-only" -split-input-file | c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\filecheck.exe C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\mlir\test\Dialect\Bufferization\Transforms\one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir # executed command: 'c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\mlir-opt.exe' 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\mlir\test\Dialect\Bufferization\Transforms\one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir' '-one-shot-bufferize=bufferize-function-boundaries test-analysis-only' -split-input-file # .---command stderr------------ # | Assertion failed: implArgAndResultAttrsOpInterface && "`::mlir::CallOpInterface` expected its base interface `::mlir::ArgAndResultAttrsOpInterface` to be registered", file C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/mlir/include\mlir/Interfaces/CallInterfaces.h.inc, line 122 # | PLEASE submit a bug report to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/ and include the crash backtrace. # | Stack dump: # | 0. Program arguments: c:\\users\\tcwg\\llvm-worker\\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\\build\\bin\\mlir-opt.exe C:\\Users\\tcwg\\llvm-worker\\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\\llvm-project\\mlir\\test\\Dialect\\Bufferization\\Transforms\\one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir "-one-shot-bufferize=bufferize-function-boundaries test-analysis-only" -split-input-file # | Exception Code: 0xC000001D # | #0 0x00007ff60737543c (c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\mlir-opt.exe+0x1af543c) # | #1 0x00007ffff958ae50 (C:\WINDOWS\System32\ucrtbase.dll+0x7ae50) # | #2 0xff61fffff958ba5c # `----------------------------- # error: command failed with exit status: 0xc000001d # executed command: 'c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\filecheck.exe' 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\mlir\test\Dialect\Bufferization\Transforms\one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir' # .---command stderr------------ # | C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\mlir\test\Dialect\Bufferization\Transforms\one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir:23:17: error: CHECK-LABEL: expected string not found in input # | // CHECK-LABEL: func @extract_slice_fun( # | ^ # | <stdin>:1:1: note: scanning from here # | module { # | ^ # | <stdin>:1:3: note: possible intended match here # | module { # | ^ # | # | Input file: <stdin> # | Check file: C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\mlir\test\Dialect\Bufferization\Transforms\one-shot-module-bufferize-analysis.mlir # | # | -dump-input=help explains the following input dump. # | # | Input was: # | <<<<<< # | 1: module { # | label:23'0 X~~~~~~~~ error: no match found # | label:23'1 ? possible intended match # | 2: } # | label:23'0 ~~ # | 3: # | label:23'0 ~ # | 4: // ----- # | label:23'0 ~~~~~~~~~ # | >>>>>> # `----------------------------- # error: command failed with exit status: 1 ... Step 7 (test-build-unified-tree-check-flang) failure: test (failure) ******************** TEST 'Flang :: Intrinsics/math-codegen.fir' FAILED ******************** Exit Code: 2 Command Output (stdout): -- # RUN: at line 1 split-file C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\flang\test\Intrinsics\math-codegen.fir C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\flang\test\Intrinsics\Output\math-codegen.fir.tmp # executed command: split-file 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\flang\test\Intrinsics\math-codegen.fir' 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\flang\test\Intrinsics\Output\math-codegen.fir.tmp' # RUN: at line 5 fir-opt C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\flang\test\Intrinsics\Output\math-codegen.fir.tmp/abs_fast.fir --fir-to-llvm-ir="target=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" | c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\filecheck.exe C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\flang\test\Intrinsics\Output\math-codegen.fir.tmp/abs_fast.fir # executed command: fir-opt 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\flang\test\Intrinsics\Output\math-codegen.fir.tmp/abs_fast.fir' --fir-to-llvm-ir=target=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu # .---command stderr------------ # | Assertion failed: implArgAndResultAttrsOpInterface && "`::mlir::CallOpInterface` expected its base interface `::mlir::ArgAndResultAttrsOpInterface` to be registered", file C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/mlir/include\mlir/Interfaces/CallInterfaces.h.inc, line 122 # | PLEASE submit a bug report to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/ and include the crash backtrace. # | Stack dump: # | 0. Program arguments: fir-opt C:\\Users\\tcwg\\llvm-worker\\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\\build\\tools\\flang\\test\\Intrinsics\\Output\\math-codegen.fir.tmp/abs_fast.fir --fir-to-llvm-ir=target=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu # | Exception Code: 0xC000001D # | #0 0x00007ff777271f54 mlir::detail::FallbackTypeIDResolver::registerImplicitTypeID(class llvm::StringRef) (c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\fir-opt.exe+0x1331f54) # | #1 0x00007ffff958ae50 (C:\WINDOWS\System32\ucrtbase.dll+0x7ae50) # | #2 0xdd54fffff958ba5c # `----------------------------- # error: command failed with exit status: 0xc000001d # executed command: 'c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\filecheck.exe' 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\flang\test\Intrinsics\Output\math-codegen.fir.tmp/abs_fast.fir' # .---command stderr------------ # | FileCheck error: '<stdin>' is empty. # | FileCheck command line: c:\users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\bin\filecheck.exe C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\flang\test\Intrinsics\Output\math-codegen.fir.tmp/abs_fast.fir # `----------------------------- # error: command failed with exit status: 2 -- ******************** — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150783#issuecomment-3131154498>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABW7H2HANJOPE6QLHGYKBD33K…> . You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.Message ID: <llvm/llvm-project/pull/150783/c3131154498(a)github.com> -- This e-mail message and any attachments thereto are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any retransmission, dissemination, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information is prohibited. If you are not the intended addressee, please contact the sender immediately and delete the materials and information from your device and system and confirm the deletion by reply e-mail.

1 month, 2 weeks

2
2
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] binutils-2_41-release-7632-g09292f4ae2c: 1 regression 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. In master-arm, after: | commit binutils-2_41-release-7632-g09292f4ae2c | Author: Indu Bhagat <indu.bhagat(a)oracle.com> | Date: Tue Aug 19 01:08:06 2025 -0700 | | binutils: dwarf: fix display of large cfa_offset | | eh_frame textual dump was not correct when the cfa_offset is a large | value. The reason is that the dumping code generally assumes the | cfa_offset is an 'int'. | ... 31 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 1 regression: | | regressions.sum: | Running gas:gas/cfi/cfi.exp ... | FAIL: CFI common 10 Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_check_binutils 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-1658. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_gnu_native_check_binutils--master-arm-build/… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_binutils--master-arm-build/… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_binutils--master-arm-build/… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_binutils--master-arm-build/… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_binutils--master-arm-build/… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/binut… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=09292f4ae2ccb…

1 month, 2 weeks

3
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-6462-g35b22764e26a: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, Probably this failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. I apologize for the false detection. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-6462-g35b22764e26a > | Author: Hassnaa Hamdi <hassnaa.hamdi(a)arm.com> > | Date: Thu Sep 4 19:31:30 2025 +0100 > | > | [LV][AArch64] Prefer epilogue with fixed-width over scalable VF. (#155546) > | > | In case of equal costs Prefer epilogue with fixed-width over scalable VF. > | That is helpful in cases like post-LTO vectorization where epilogue with > | fixed-width VF can be removed when we eventually know that the trip count > | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0136 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0136/Fujitsu-Fortran-0136_0012.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu -DTEST_SUITE_FUJITSU_WITH_FAST_MATH=ON "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-2090. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/35b22764e26aa02ef3ad849bb449bf7…

1 month, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-6898-gdf430c33a71f: Failure on aarch64

by Nathan Chancellor

On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 05:23:47AM +0000, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > In tcwg_kernel/llvm-master-aarch64-stable-allyesconfig, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-6898-gdf430c33a71f > | Author: Nathan Chancellor <nathan(a)kernel.org> > | Date: Mon Sep 8 11:33:57 2025 -0700 > | > | [Frontend] Define __SANITIZE__ macros for kernel address variants (#156543) > | > | GCC defines these macros for both userspace and kernel address > | sanitizers: > | > | ... 29 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces Failure: > | Results changed to > | # reset_artifacts: > | -10 > | # build_abe binutils: > | -9 > | # build_kernel_llvm: > | -5 > | # build_abe qemu: > | -2 > | # linux_n_obj: > | 316 > | # First few build errors in logs: > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] > | # 00:08:01 ./include/linux/compiler-clang.h:28:9: error: '__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined] Thanks for the report. The kernel side fix for this has been picked up in a maintainer's tree [1] so it should be in Linus's tree soon then into stable shortly after that. This was already a problem in certain trees with CONFIG_KCSAN and __SANITIZE_THREAD__, I just made it a little worse ;) [1]: https://git.kernel.org/akpm/mm/c/3fac212fe489aa0dbe8d80a42a7809840ca7b0f9 Cheers, Nathan

1 month, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-3649-gc440b585ba3: 4 regressions on master-thumb_m3_softfp_eabi

by Luc Grosheintz

I'd like to apologize for causing these regressions. Below I've copied out the relevant parts from the logs. To me it looks like _Xv is a reserved identifier. I'll prepare a patch to fix the issue. On 9/9/25 6:54 AM, 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 arm-eabi cortex-m3 softfp, after: > | commit gcc-16-3649-gc440b585ba3 > | Author: Luc Grosheintz <luc.grosheintz(a)gmail.com> > | Date: Thu Sep 4 14:20:28 2025 +0200 > | > | libstdc++: Implement constant_wrapper, cw from P2781R9. > | > | This is a partial implementation of P2781R9. It adds std::cw and > | std::constant_wrapper, but doesn't modify __integral_constant_like for > | span/mdspan. > | ... 25 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 4 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running g++:g++.old-deja/old-deja.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.robertl/eb39.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) Code: 4651: template<_CwFixedValue _Xv, typename> 4652: struct constant_wrapper : _CwOperators 4653: { Compiler error: /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/builds/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/arm-eabi/gcc-gcc.git~master-stage2/arm-eabi/libstdc++-v3/include/type_traits:4651:26: error: expected '>' before numeric constant My guess is that _Xv is a reserved name. It's not on the list of common bad identifiers [1], but it's the only guess I have. [1]: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/source_code_style.html > | FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.robertl/eb54.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) Same as above. > | UNRESOLVED: g++.old-deja/g++.robertl/eb54.C -std=c++26 compilation failed to produce executable Same as above. > | FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.warn/iomanip.C -std=gnu++26 (test for excess errors) Same as above. > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc arm-eabi -mthumb -march=armv7-m -mtune=cortex-m3 -mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=auto > *configure and test flags:* --target arm-eabi --disable-multilib --with-mode=thumb --with-cpu=cortex-m3 --with-float=softfp --target_board=-mthumb/-march=armv7-m/-mtune=cortex-m3/-mfloat-abi=softfp/-mfpu=auto qemu_cpu=cortex-m3 > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1676. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m3_softfp_… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m3_softfp_… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m3_softfp_… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m3_softfp_… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m3_softfp_… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/s… > > Full commit : See in git+ssh://linaroci@gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git

1 month, 3 weeks

2
2
0 0

RE: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-6821-ga103b9b207f6: 1 regression on aarch64

by Jean Perier

Thanks for the report. There is also an LLVM issue tracking this. I commented there: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/157763#issuecomment-3273773003 The test is violating F2023 C15121 that is not properly enforced by flang semantics but that lowering now relies on. Although we will likely improve LEN lowering which would have the side effect of working around the segfault in the specific case of 0727_0008, I think we will enforce C15121 in a manner that will reject it. See The LLVM link for more details and suggestion on how to fix the test. Jean Perier -----Original Message----- From: ci_notify(a)linaro.org <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2025 6:12 AM To: ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com; itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com; t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com Cc: maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org; Jean Perier <jperier(a)nvidia.com> Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-6821-ga103b9b207f6: 1 regression on aarch64 [You don't often get email from ci_notify(a)linaro.org. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-O0-debug, after: | commit llvmorg-22-init-6821-ga103b9b207f6 | Author: jeanPerier <jperier(a)nvidia.com> | Date: Mon Sep 8 12:07:37 2025 +0200 | | [flang][lowering] fix vector subscripts in character elemental procedures (#156661) | | Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/145151 | | Character elemental procedures require evaluating the result | ... 22 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 1 regression: | | regressions.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0727 ... | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0727/Fujitsu-Fortran-0727_0008.test | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one Used configuration : * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-2088. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1378… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1378… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1378… Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1378… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1377… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a103b9b207f67e0afbaf41647a56a4c…

1 month, 3 weeks

2
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-6056-g89f53af3fffe: 3 regressions on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, These errors are caused by incorrect test programs. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the tests. I apologize for the false detection. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-6056-g89f53af3fffe > | Author: Yingwei Zheng <dtcxzyw2333(a)gmail.com> > | Date: Tue Sep 2 21:41:02 2025 +0800 > | > | [ConstraintElim] Use constraints from bounded memory accesses (#155253) > | > | This patch removes bound checks that are dominated by bounded memory > | accesses. For example, if we have an array `int A[5]` and `A[idx]` is > | performed successfully, we know that `idx u< 5` after the load. > | ... 7 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 3 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/C/0094 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/C/0094/Fujitsu-C-0094_0040.test > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/C/0137 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/C/0137/Fujitsu-C-0137_0280.test > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/C/0170 ... > | ... and 1 more > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu -DTEST_SUITE_FUJITSU_WITH_FAST_MATH=ON "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-2086. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/89f53af3fffed3e41167fbb7bc10d48…

1 month, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-5791-ga36c13492afa: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, Probably this failure is a false detection caused by the fast-math flag. The test uses NaN and very large values. Appending -fhonor-nans -fhonor-infinities resolves the failure. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-5791-ga36c13492afa > | Author: Slava Zakharin <szakharin(a)nvidia.com> > | Date: Fri Aug 29 13:04:55 2025 -0700 > | > | [flang] Re-enable setting `noalias` on procedure arguments. (#155949) > | > | This is a follow-up on #140803, which was disabled in #142128 > | due to #143219. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0351 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0351/Fujitsu-Fortran-0351_0099.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu -DTEST_SUITE_FUJITSU_WITH_FAST_MATH=ON "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-2081. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a36c13492afa64f925a9cf6ffe99534…

2 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-5728-gf19b807a2362: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This error is caused by an incorrect test program. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-5728-gf19b807a2362 > | Author: Peter Klausler <pklausler(a)nvidia.com> > | Date: Fri Aug 29 07:49:09 2025 -0700 > | > | [flang] Extend error checking for implicit interfaces (#155473) > | > | When an external procedure is called by means of an implicit interface > | that turns out to be different in a significant way from the actual > | interface in its definition elsewhere in the source file, we emit an > | ... 5 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0178 ... > | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0178/Fujitsu-Fortran-0178_0006.test > | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu -DTEST_SUITE_FUJITSU_WITH_FAST_MATH=ON "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-2079. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f19b807a23628776895cfc02f4a2938…

2 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-5156-g8849750e9988: 1 regression 1 fix on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This commit is practically a revert commit. This commit should not be harmful. Our team will take a look. Please ignore the mail. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_vla-mpipeliner-stack_arrays, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-5156-g8849750e9988 > | Author: Nikita Popov <npopov(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Tue Aug 26 09:14:21 2025 +0200 > | > | [flang] Disable loop interchange by default (#155279) > | > | Disable loop interchange by default, while keeping the ability to > | explicitly enable using `-floop-interchange`. This matches Clang. > | > | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression 1 fix: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0631 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0631/Fujitsu-Fortran-0631_0058.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > | > | fixes.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0347 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0347/Fujitsu-Fortran-0347_0240.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG -fstack-arrays" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1756. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8849750e998819903dc749411bc9a7c…

2 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-4761-g6560adb58405: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, Probably this failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-4761-g6560adb58405 > | Author: Connector Switch <c8ef(a)outlook.com> > | Date: Fri Aug 22 15:55:46 2025 +0800 > | > | [flang] optimize atand/atan2d precision (#154544) > | > | Part of https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/150452. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0360 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0360/Fujitsu-Fortran-0360_0271.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra" "-DLLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES=openmp" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin2/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu -DTEST_SUITE_FUJITSU_WITH_FAST_MATH=ON "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1752. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/LinaroLtd/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/6560adb5840596afbeb3f4574bf6d0c…

2 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-3301-g724d88900b7: Failure on arm

by Sam James

See PR121618. Should be fixed now.

2 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

[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!

2 months, 1 week

2
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-3093-gc7de7ddbfae: 1 regression on aarch64

by Sam James

-> PR121494

2 months, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-556-g620f0730f31: 8 regressions 1564 fixes on aarch64

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

[This is a CI regression report that wasn't sent due to infra problem.] Hi Florian, Your glibc patch fixes a lot of failures in GDB testsuite, but also creates a few new FAILs -- are these expected? Thanks! === Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In master-aarch64, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-556-g620f0730f31 | Author: Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com> | Date: Mon Jul 28 14:16:52 2025 +0200 | | elf: Compile _dl_debug_state separately (bug 33224) | | This ensures that the compiler will not inline it, so that | debuggers which do not use the Systemtap probes can reliably | set a breakpoint on it. | ... 3 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 8 regressions 1564 fixes: | | regressions.sum: | Running gdb:gdb.dap/cxx-exception.exp ... | FAIL: gdb.dap/cxx-exception.exp: exceptions in log file | Running gdb:gdb.dap/ptrref.exp ... | FAIL: gdb.dap/ptrref.exp: exceptions in log file | Running gdb:gdb.threads/process-dies-while-detaching.exp ... | ... and 7 more | | fixes.sum: | Running gdb:gdb.arch/aarch64-sve-sigunwind.exp ... | FAIL: gdb.arch/aarch64-sve-sigunwind.exp: $\z2.b.u contents were correctly unwound | FAIL: gdb.arch/aarch64-sve-sigunwind.exp: size of $\z3.b.u was correctly unwound | FAIL: gdb.arch/aarch64-sve-sigunwind.exp: $\z12.b.u contents were correctly unwound | FAIL: gdb.arch/aarch64-sve-sigunwind.exp: $\z22.b.u contents were correctly unwound | ... and 1676 more Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb master-aarch64 *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-692. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-aarch64-build/1… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc/sh… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=620f0730f311635cd0e1… -- Maxim Kuvyrkov https://www.linaro.org

2 months, 3 weeks

3
2
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-2744-ga15b629527a9: Failure on aarch64

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_flang_build/main-aarch64, after: | commit llvmorg-22-init-2744-ga15b629527a9 | Author: Jon Roelofs <jonathan_roelofs(a)apple.com> | Date: Tue Aug 5 17:08:00 2025 -0700 | | Revert "Strip the full path from __FILE__ in the LDBG macro and keep only the filename (#150677)" | | This reverts commit 5d26e3c227f4b4a1761a8b0001b3165198def479. | | It breaks the modules build of clang, since every source file has a different | ... 9 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces Failure: | Results changed to | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_llvm -- clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra openmp : | # FAILED | # First few build errors in logs: | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/llvm/include/llvm/Support/DebugLog.h:71:12: error: a type specifier is required for all declarations | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/llvm/include/llvm/Support/DebugLog.h:77:4: error: identifier 'raw_ldbg_ostream' after '~' in destructor name does not name a type | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/llvm/include/llvm/Support/DebugLog.h:54:9: error: member initializer 'os' does not name a non-static data member or base class | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/llvm/include/llvm/Support/DebugLog.h:59:23: error: use of undeclared identifier 'os' | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/llvm/include/llvm/Support/DebugLog.h:61:12: error: use of undeclared identifier 'os' | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/llvm/include/llvm/Support/DebugLog.h:73:7: error: only constructors take base initializers | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/llvm/include/llvm/Support/DebugLog.h:75:5: error: use of undeclared identifier 'SetUnbuffered' | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/mlir/lib/IR/PatternLoggingListener.cpp:10:3: error: use of undeclared identifier '_GET_LDBG_MACRO' | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/mlir/lib/IR/PatternLoggingListener.cpp:17:3: error: use of undeclared identifier '_GET_LDBG_MACRO' | # 00:03:30 ../llvm/mlir/lib/IR/PatternLoggingListener.cpp:24:3: error: use of undeclared identifier '_GET_LDBG_MACRO' | | From | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_llvm -- clang;lld;flang;clang-tools-extra openmp : | 1 Used configuration : tcwg_flang_build/main-aarch64 We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1738. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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 * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_build--main-aarch64-build/5111/artifac… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_build--main-aarch64-build/5111/artifac… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_build--main-aarch64-build/5111/artifac… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_build--main-aarch64-build/5108/artifac… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a15b629527a975ec592c95d69d04ef3…

2 months, 4 weeks

1
0
0 0

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

3 months

3
6
2 0

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

3 months

2
2
0 0

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

3 months

1
0
0 0

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

3 months

1
0
0 0

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.

3 months

1
0
0 0

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.

3 months

1
0
0 0

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.

3 months, 1 week

2
1
0 0

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.

3 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

[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…

3 months, 2 weeks

2
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-22-init-340-ge8a891b0f9d2: 4 regressions on aarch64

by Jonathan Cohen

I have pushed the following PR to address issues in my patch: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/149703 I haven’t verified that it fixes your regression, will do that shortly. Jonathan > On 18 Jul 2025, at 20:40, 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 tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-22-init-340-ge8a891b0f9d2 > | Author: Jonathan Cohen <joncoh(a)apple.com> > | Date: Thu Jul 17 19:21:57 2025 +0300 > | > | [AArch64][Machine-Combiner] Split gather patterns into neon regs to multiple vectors (#142941) > | > | This changes optimizes gather-like sequences, where we load values > | separately into lanes of a neon vector. Since each load has serial > | dependency, when performing multiple i32 loads into a 128 bit vector for example, it > | ... 3 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 4 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0631 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0631/Fujitsu-Fortran-0631_0110.test > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0631/Fujitsu-Fortran-0631_0111.test > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0640 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0640/Fujitsu-Fortran-0640_0074.test > | ... and 2 more > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1731. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/e8a891b0f9d2a742ac3904116aaec2c…

3 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-2334-g9e330977385: 2 regressions on arm

by Jonathan Wakely

Tomasz, The new __any_input_iterator type should only be declared for C++20 and higher, so guarded by __cpp_lib_concepts Just checking __cpp_concepts isn't enough, because that's true for -std=c++17 -fconcepts but std::input_iterator isn't defined in that case. On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 at 17:18, <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 arm-eabi v7-a softfp, after: > | commit gcc-16-2334-g9e330977385 > | Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Thu Jun 5 12:05:19 2025 +0100 > | > | libstdc++: Add std::inplace_vector for C++26 (P0843R14) [PR119137] > | > | Implement std::inplace_vector as specified in P0843R14, without follow > | up papers, in particular P3074R7 (trivial unions). In consequence > | inplace_vector<T, N> can be used inside constant evaluations only > | ... 62 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running g++:g++.dg/dg.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.dg/concepts/expression.C -std=gnu++17 (test for excess errors) > | UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/concepts/expression.C -std=gnu++17 compilation failed to produce executable > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc arm-eabi -marm -march=armv7-a -mfpu=vfpv3-d16 -mfloat-abi=softfp > *configure and test flags:* --target arm-eabi --disable-multilib --with-mode=arm --with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=vfpv3-d16 --with-float=softfp --target_board=-marm/-march=armv7-a/-mfpu=vfpv3-d16/-mfloat-abi=softfp qemu_cpu=cortex-a9 > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1636. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_v7a_softfp_e… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_v7a_softfp_e… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_v7a_softfp_e… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_v7a_softfp_e… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_v7a_softfp_e… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/sha1… > > Full commit : See in git+ssh://linaroci@gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git

3 months, 2 weeks

1
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-18750-gdd60663b9bfa: 2 regressions on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, Probably this failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-18750-gdd60663b9bfa > | Author: Alexey Bataev <a.bataev(a)outlook.com> > | Date: Wed Jul 9 19:52:09 2025 -0400 > | > | [SLP] Emit reduction instead of 2 extracts + scalar op, when vectorizing operands (#147583) > | > | Added emission of the 2-element reduction instead of 2 extracts + scalar > | op, when trying to vectorize operands of the instruction, if it is more > | profitable. > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/C/0030 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/C/0030/Fujitsu-C-0030_0056.test > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0334 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0334/Fujitsu-Fortran-0334_0012.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1728. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/dd60663b9bfaab15362a850ba7f63ba…

3 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-509-g3d3572f590: Failure 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. In master-arm, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-509-g3d3572f590 | Author: Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com> | Date: Fri Jul 11 16:04:07 2025 +0200 | | Linux: Keep termios ioctl constants strictly internal | | Undefine TCGETS, TCGETS2, and related ioctl constants in the installed | headers. Extract the correct constants (using the kernel type | definitions) automatically from the UAPI headers. The kernel | ... 11 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces Failure: | Results changed to | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe stage1 --: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 3 | # build_abe glibc: | 4 | # build_abe stage2 --: | # FAILED | # build_abe gdb: | # build_abe qemu: | # First few build errors in logs: | # 00:07:05 /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_1/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cpp:766:27: error: ‘TCGETS’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TCGETX’? | # 00:07:05 /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_1/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cpp:772:27: error: ‘TCSETS’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TCSETA’? | # 00:07:05 /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_1/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cpp:773:28: error: ‘TCSETSF’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TCSETAF’? | # 00:07:05 /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_1/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cpp:774:28: error: ‘TCSETSW’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TCSETAW’? | # 00:07:05 make[4]: *** [Makefile:627: sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.lo] Error 1 | # 00:07:05 make[3]: *** [Makefile:533: all-recursive] Error 1 | # 00:07:05 make[2]: *** [Makefile:420: all] Error 2 | # 00:07:05 make[1]: *** [Makefile:12804: all-target-libsanitizer] Error 2 | # 00:07:05 make: *** [Makefile:1068: all] Error 2 | | From | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe stage1 --: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 3 | # build_abe glibc: | 4 | # build_abe stage2 --: | 5 | # build_abe gdb: | 6 | # build_abe qemu: | 7 Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_cross_build master-arm *configure and test flags:* --target arm-linux-gnueabihf We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1632. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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 * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-arm-build/1136/artif… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-arm-build/1136/artif… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-arm-build/1136/artif… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-arm-build/1135/artif… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc/sh… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=3d3572f59059e2b19b85…

3 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-2112-gac2fb60a67d6: Failure on master-thumb_m7_hard_eabi

by Jonathan Wakely

On Wed, 9 Jul 2025, 08:22 , <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 arm-eabi cortex-m7 hard, after: > | commit gcc-16-2112-gac2fb60a67d6 > | Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Fri Jul 4 16:44:13 2025 +0100 > | > | libstdc++: Ensure pool resources meet alignment requirements > [PR118681] > | > | For allocations with size > alignment and size % alignment != 0 we > were > | sometimes returning pointers that did not meet the requested > aligment. > | For example, allocate(24, 16) would select the pool for 24-byte > objects > | ... 23 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces Failure: > | Results changed to > | # reset_artifacts: > | -10 > | # true: > | 0 > | # build_abe binutils: > | 1 > | # build_abe stage1 -- --set gcc_override_configure=--disable-multilib > --set gcc_override_configure=--with-mode=thumb --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-cpu=cortex-m7 --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-float=hard: > | 2 > | # build_abe newlib: > | 4 > | # build_abe stage2 -- --set gcc_override_configure=--disable-multilib > --set gcc_override_configure=--with-mode=thumb --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-cpu=cortex-m7 --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-float=hard: > | # FAILED > | # build_abe gdb: > | # build_abe qemu: > | # First few build errors in logs: > | # 00:06:32 > /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_1/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/memory_resource.cc:1474:29: > error: ‘choose_block_size’ was not declared in this scope > | # 00:06:32 > /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_1/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/memory_resource.cc:1491:25: > error: ‘choose_block_size’ was not declared in this scope > | # 00:06:32 make[5]: *** [Makefile:587: memory_resource.lo] Error 1 > | # 00:06:32 make[4]: *** [Makefile:797: all-recursive] Error 1 > | # 00:06:32 make[3]: *** [Makefile:577: all-recursive] Error 1 > | # 00:06:32 make[2]: *** [Makefile:502: all] Error 2 > | # 00:06:32 make[1]: *** [Makefile:12269: all-target-libstdc++-v3] > Error 2 > | # 00:06:32 make: *** [Makefile:1062: all] Error 2 > | > | From > | # reset_artifacts: > | -10 > | # true: > | 0 > | # build_abe binutils: > | 1 > | # build_abe stage1 -- --set gcc_override_configure=--disable-multilib > --set gcc_override_configure=--with-mode=thumb --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-cpu=cortex-m7 --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-float=hard: > | 2 > | # build_abe newlib: > | 4 > | # build_abe stage2 -- --set gcc_override_configure=--disable-multilib > --set gcc_override_configure=--with-mode=thumb --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-cpu=cortex-m7 --set > gcc_override_configure=--with-float=hard: > | 5 > | # build_abe gdb: > | 6 > | # build_abe qemu: > | 7 > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_embed_build arm-eabi -mthumb -march=armv7e-m+fp.dp > -mtune=cortex-m7 -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=auto > *configure and test flags:* --target arm-eabi --disable-multilib > --with-mode=thumb --with-cpu=cortex-m7 --with-float=hard > --target_board=-mthumb/-march=armv7e-m+fp.dp/-mtune=cortex-m7/-mfloat-abi=hard/-mfpu=auto > qemu_cpu=cortex-m7 > > We track this bug report under > https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1625. Please let us know if you > have a fix. > I know what's wrong, will fix in a couple of hours. The definition of choose_pool_size needs to be moved outside the preprocessor group guarded by #ifdef _GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS > 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 > * > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_build--master-thumb_m7_hard_eabi-b… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and > make commands are in > * > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_build--master-thumb_m7_hard_eabi-b… > > Current build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_build--master-thumb_m7_hard_eabi-b… > Reference build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_build--master-thumb_m7_hard_eabi-b… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : > https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/sha1… > > Full commit : See in git+ssh://linaroci@gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git

3 months, 3 weeks

2
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #115820: Failure on aarch64

by H.J. Lu

I am testing this. On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 7:10 AM <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 simplebootstrap_build master-aarch64-bootstrap, after: > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/115820 > | Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools(a)gmail.com> > | Date: Sat Jun 28 06:27:25 2025 +0800 > | > | [PATCH] Check backend when setting DECL_ALIGN for PARM_DECL > | > | Since a backend may ignore type alignment for arguments passed on stack, > | call targetm.calls.function_arg_boundary to set DECL_ALIGN for PARM_DECL > | and change __alignof to return DECL_ALIGN, instead of TYPE_ALIGN, for > | ... 21 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | ed912b1ee5a libstdc++: Fix attribute order on __normal_iterator friends [PR120949] > > Produces Failure: > | Results changed to > | # reset_artifacts: > | -10 > | # true: > | 0 > | # build_abe bootstrap: > | # FAILED > | # First few build errors in logs: > | # 00:04:46 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_2/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/config/aarch64/lse-init.c:44:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault > | # 00:04:47 make[3]: *** [/home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_2/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/config/aarch64/t-lse:41: lse-init.o] Error 1 > | # 00:04:47 make[2]: *** [Makefile:19575: all-stage1-target-libgcc] Error 2 > | # 00:04:47 make[1]: *** [Makefile:25557: stage1-bubble] Error 2 > | # 00:04:47 make: *** [Makefile:1106: all] Error 2 > | > | From > | # reset_artifacts: > | -10 > | # true: > | 0 > | # build_abe bootstrap: > | 1 > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_simplebootstrap_build master-aarch64-bootstrap > *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 > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_simplebootstrap_build--master-aarch64-bootst… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_simplebootstrap_build--master-aarch64-bootst… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_simplebootstrap_build--master-aarch64-bootst… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_simplebootstrap_build--master-aarch64-bootst… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files. -- H.J.

3 months, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] v10.0.0-1793-g932522a9ddc: 6 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. In master-arm, after: | commit v10.0.0-1793-g932522a9ddc | Author: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson(a)linaro.org> | Date: Mon Oct 23 14:29:46 2023 -0700 | | tcg/optimize: Fold and to extract during optimize | | Reviewed-by: Pierrick Bouvier <pierrick.bouvier(a)linaro.org> | Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson(a)linaro.org> Produces 6 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running gcc:gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/advsimd-intrinsics.exp ... | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vshl.c -O1 execution test | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vshl.c -O2 execution test | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vshl.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none execution test | FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/advsimd-intrinsics/vshl.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects execution test | ... and 2 more Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc master-arm *configure and test flags:* --target arm-linux-gnueabihf We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1617. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/2154/a… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/2154/a… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/2154/a… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/2154/a… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/2153/a… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/qemu/sha… Full commit : https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/commit/932522a9ddc1f7c7866009cd73eaf79…

4 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-15039-gea9046699eae: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-15039-gea9046699eae > | Author: Paul Walker <paul.walker(a)arm.com> > | Date: Wed Jun 11 11:02:32 2025 +0100 > | > | [LLVM][SROA] Teach SROA how to "bitcast" between fixed and scalable vectors. (#130973) > | > | For function whose vscale_range is limited to a single value we can size > | scalable vectors. This aids SROA by allowing scalable vector load and > | store operations to be considered for replacement whereby bitcasts > | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0136 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0136/Fujitsu-Fortran-0136_0012.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1716. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ea9046699eae04ac5159a1666f19b5b…

4 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-1905-g7165ca43caf: Failure on arm

by Sam James

Thanks. See https://gcc.gnu.org/PR120929. Qing, you may be able to reproduce it on x86-64 with ./configure --with-build-config="bootstrap-ubsan" && make -j$(nproc) -l$(nproc) too.

4 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-16543-g7d2293d1d953: 2 regressions on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-16543-g7d2293d1d953 > | Author: Ross Kirsling <ross.kirsling(a)sony.com> > | Date: Tue Jun 24 09:51:49 2025 -0700 > | > | [InstCombine] KnownBits::isNonNegative should recognize `b - a` after `a <= b` (#145105) > | > | Alive2: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/an9npN > | Fixes #142283. > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0117 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0117/Fujitsu-Fortran-0117_0070.test > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0680 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0680/Fujitsu-Fortran-0680_0065.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1715. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7d2293d1d95379bbdbb6446b088219a…

4 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-14994-g163c67ad3d1b: 41 regressions on aarch64

by Peter Klausler

That patch was reverted. From: ci_notify(a)linaro.org <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> Date: Monday, June 23, 2025 at 07:20 To: ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com <ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com>, itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com <itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com>, t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com <t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com> Cc: maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org <maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org>, Peter Klausler <pklausler(a)nvidia.com> Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-14994-g163c67ad3d1b: 41 regressions on aarch64 External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-O0-debug, after: | commit llvmorg-21-init-14994-g163c67ad3d1b | Author: Peter Klausler <pklausler(a)nvidia.com> | Date: Tue Jun 10 14:44:19 2025 -0700 | | [flang][runtime] Replace recursion with iterative work queue (#137727) | | Recursion, both direct and indirect, prevents accurate stack size | calculation at link time for GPU device code. Restructure these | recursive (often mutually so) routines in the Fortran runtime with new | ... 15 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 41 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0449 ... | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0449/Fujitsu-Fortran-0449_0000.test | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0449/Fujitsu-Fortran-0449_0001.test | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0449/Fujitsu-Fortran-0449_0002.test | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0449/Fujitsu-Fortran-0449_0003.test | ... and 41 more | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one Used configuration : * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" We track this bug report under https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro.at…<https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1708>. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1042…> The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1042…> The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1042…> Fujitsu testsuite : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…<https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/> Current build : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1042…> Reference build : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1041…> Instruction to reproduce the build : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitlab.co…<https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha…> Full commit : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/163c67ad3d1bf7af6590930d8f18700…>

4 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-450-g0dbbc44bfd2: 2 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. In master-arm, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-450-g0dbbc44bfd2 | Author: Andreas Schwab <schwab(a)suse.de> | Date: Wed Jun 18 13:17:29 2025 +0200 | | Fix termios related targets | | Move Linux-specific termios headers and tests from misc to termios subdir | and install newly added bits/termios-cbaud.h. Produces 2 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running gdb:gdb.base/term.exp ... | FAIL: gdb.base/term.exp: initial: info terminal | Running gdb:gdb.reverse/test_ioctl_TCSETSW.exp ... | FAIL: gdb.reverse/test_ioctl_TCSETSW.exp: handle TCSETSW Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb 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-1610. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/2049/… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/2049/… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/2049/… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/2049/… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/2048/… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc/sh… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=0dbbc44bfd256683705c…

4 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-1550-g9244ea4bf556: Failure on aarch64

by Sam James

Could you file a glibc bug for this please? It needs some analysis to see if it's an FP or not. There's actually a suppression for -Os already there: if (elem < table_size) { /* Compare the byte sequence but only if this is not part of a range. */ /* The compiler might warn that idx may be used uninitialized, however it will be reached iff elem < table_size which means that it was properly set in the loop above. */ DIAG_PUSH_NEEDS_COMMENT; DIAG_IGNORE_Os_NEEDS_COMMENT (8, "-Wmaybe-uninitialized"); if (! is_range # if WIDE_CHAR_VERSION && __wmemcmp (n, &wextra[1], c1) == 0 # else && memcmp (n, &extra[idx + 1], c1) == 0 # endif ) { n += c1 - 1; goto matched; } DIAG_POP_NEEDS_COMMENT;

4 months, 2 weeks

3
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-14927-g007d29e30c6e: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, As discussed in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/141928 , this is an error of the test program Fortran/0614/0614_0005.f. Please ignore the mail, sorry. We've fixed the test internally. It will be pushd to the GitHub. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-14927-g007d29e30c6e > | Author: Dominik Adamski <dominik.adamski(a)amd.com> > | Date: Tue Jun 10 16:46:13 2025 +0200 > | > | [Flang] Turn on alias analysis for locally allocated objects (#143489) > | > | Previously, a bug in the MemCptOpt LLVM IR pass caused issues with > | adding alias tags for locally allocated objects for Fortran code. > | > | ... 8 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0614 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0614/Fujitsu-Fortran-0614_0005.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1707. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/007d29e30c6e311501ed97b7a368521…

4 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

[automated CI mails] Need help with a regression Linaro CI notified me of

by Filip Kastl

Hi all. I got an automated mail about this GCC regression related to one of my commits. https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1578 The mail itself mentioned only a testsuite regression. I fixed that. However, this was also linked in the mail: https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_bootstrap_build--master-arm-bootstrap_profil… That looks like a different regression. As far as I can tell, `make profiledbootstrap` is failing on arm. I have only very limited access to arm machines. I tried to reproduce this on an Aarch64 machine and didn't succeed. Could you check that this regression is still present on current trunk and/or help me reproduce it? Btw the "Instructions to reproduce the build" link doesn't work for me. I get "Request is not authorized". https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… Thanks, Filip Kastl

4 months, 2 weeks

2
2
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-434-g5cf101a85aa: Failure on aarch64

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In master-aarch64, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-434-g5cf101a85aa | Author: H. Peter Anvin (Intel) <hpa(a)zytor.com> | Date: Wed Jun 11 18:35:36 2025 -0700 | | linux: implement arbitrary and split speeds in termios | | Linux has supported arbitrary speeds and split speeds in the kernel | since 2008 on all platforms except Alpha (fixed in 2020), but glibc | was never updated to match. This is further complicated by POSIX uses | ... 33 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces Failure: | Results changed to | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe stage1 --: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 3 | # build_abe glibc: | 4 | # build_abe stage2 --: | # FAILED | # build_abe gdb: | # build_abe qemu: | # First few build errors in logs: | # 00:12:17 /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_1/abe/builds/destdir/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc/usr/include/bits/termios.h:54:10: fatal error: bits/termios-cbaud.h: No such file or directory | # 00:12:17 make[4]: *** [Makefile:627: sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.lo] Error 1 | # 00:12:17 make[3]: *** [Makefile:533: all-recursive] Error 1 | # 00:12:17 make[2]: *** [Makefile:420: all] Error 2 | # 00:12:17 make[1]: *** [Makefile:12801: all-target-libsanitizer] Error 2 | # 00:12:17 make: *** [Makefile:1065: all] Error 2 | | From | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe stage1 --: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 3 | # build_abe glibc: | 4 | # build_abe stage2 --: | 5 | # build_abe gdb: | 6 | # build_abe qemu: | 7 Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_cross_build master-aarch64 *configure and test flags:* --target aarch64-linux-gnu We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1607. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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 * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1133/a… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1133/a… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1133/a… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1132/a… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc/sh… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=5cf101a85aae0d703cdd…

4 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-14805-g112490f06abc: 2 regressions on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This is probably a false detection by a precision error of floating-point arithmetic. Please ignore the mail. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-14805-g112490f06abc > | Author: Craig Topper <craig.topper(a)sifive.com> > | Date: Mon Jun 9 12:38:08 2025 -0700 > | > | [ConstantFolding] Add support for llvm.atan in constant folding. (#143416) > | > | Fixes #143360 > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0360 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0360/Fujitsu-Fortran-0360_0269.test > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0360/Fujitsu-Fortran-0360_0272.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1704. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/112490f06abca669eb3fe158739bf75…

4 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-423-gcde5caa4bb2: 1 regression 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. In glibc_check master-arm, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-423-gcde5caa4bb2 | Author: Cupertino Miranda <cupertino.miranda(a)oracle.com> | Date: Mon Jun 16 12:51:53 2025 +0000 | | malloc: add testing for large tcache support | | This patch adds large tcache support tests by re-executing malloc tests | using the tunable: glibc.malloc.tcache_max=1048576 | Test names are postfixed with "largetcache". | ... 2 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 1 regression: | | regressions.sum: | Running glibc:. ... | FAIL: lint-makefiles Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_glibc_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-1606. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_glibc_check--master-arm-build/2931/artifact/… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/2931/artifact/… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/2931/artifact/… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/2931/artifact/… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/2930/artifact/… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc/sh… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=cde5caa4bb21d5c474b9…

4 months, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-417-gf3c82fc1b4: Failure on aarch64

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In glibc_build master-aarch64, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-417-gf3c82fc1b4 | Author: Radko Krkos <krkos(a)mail.muni.cz> | Date: Sat Jun 14 11:07:40 2025 +0200 | | io: Mark lockf() __wur [BZ #32800] | | In commit 0476597b28 flock() was marked __wur in posix/unistd.h, but not | in io/fcntl.h, the declarations must match. | | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces Failure: | Results changed to | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # init_abe_sysroot: | 0 | # build_abe glibc -- --disable install: | # FAILED | # First few build errors in logs: | # 00:01:42 programs/locarchive.c:641:18: error: ignoring return value of ‘lockf64’ declared with attribute ‘warn_unused_result’ [-Werror=unused-result] | # 00:01:42 programs/locarchive.c:653:14: error: ignoring return value of ‘lockf64’ declared with attribute ‘warn_unused_result’ [-Werror=unused-result] | # 00:01:42 programs/locarchive.c:660:14: error: ignoring return value of ‘lockf64’ declared with attribute ‘warn_unused_result’ [-Werror=unused-result] | # 00:01:42 programs/locarchive.c:679:14: error: ignoring return value of ‘lockf64’ declared with attribute ‘warn_unused_result’ [-Werror=unused-result] | # 00:01:42 make[2]: *** [../o-iterator.mk:9: /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_3/abe/builds/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/glibc-glibc.git~master/locale/locarchive.o] Error 1 | # 00:01:42 make[1]: *** [Makefile:484: locale/others] Error 2 | # 00:01:42 make: *** [Makefile:20: all] Error 2 | | From | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # init_abe_sysroot: | 0 | # build_abe glibc -- --disable install: | 1 Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_glibc_build master-aarch64 *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1605. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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 * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_build--master-aarch64-build/2952/artif… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_build--master-aarch64-build/2952/artif… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_build--master-aarch64-build/2952/artif… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_build--master-aarch64-build/2950/artif… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/glibc/sh… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=f3c82fc1b41261f582f5…

4 months, 3 weeks

2
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc patch #113987: 1 regression on aarch64

by H.J. Lu

On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 10:02 PM <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 glibc_check master-aarch64, after: > | glibc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/113987 > | Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools(a)gmail.com> > | Date: Mon Jun 9 05:22:10 2025 +0800 > | > | [PATCH] i386: Update ___tls_get_addr to preserve vector registers > | > | Compiler generates the following instruction sequence for dynamic TLS > | access: > | > | ... 44 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 0a027674a10 x86: Avoid GLRO(dl_x86_cpu_features) > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running glibc:elf ... > | FAIL: elf/tst-tls23 So, this is a run-time failure. What happens if you run it by hand? > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_glibc_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_glibc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3701/a… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3701/a… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3701/a… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-aarch64-precommit/3701/a… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-aarch64-build/2930/artif… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files. -- H.J.

4 months, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Fwd: ☠ Buildbot (LLVM Buildbot): flang-arm64-windows-msvc - failed build (failure) (main)

by Cameron McInally

Hi Linaro folks, It appears my latest commit has broken your BuildBot: fatal error: file 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\llvm\include\llvm\Support\Compiler.h' has been modified since the precompiled header 'C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/./cmake_pch.cxx.pch' was built: size changed (was 26948, now 27102) note: please rebuild precompiled header 'C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/./cmake_pch.cxx.pch' I'm not sure if it's possible for me to rebuild the precompiled header myself. Any suggestions on how to proceed? Thanks in advance, Cameron ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: <llvm.buildmaster(a)lab.llvm.org> Date: Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 6:13 PM Subject: ☠ Buildbot (LLVM Buildbot): flang-arm64-windows-msvc - failed build (failure) (main) To: Cameron McInally <cameron.mcinally(a)nyu.edu>, Thurston Dang <thurston(a)google.com> Cc: <llvm.buildmaster(a)lab.llvm.org> The Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder flang-arm64-windows-msvc while building clang. Full details are available at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lab.llvm.org_buildbot_… Worker for this Build: linaro-armv8-windows-msvc-01 Blamelist: Cameron McInally <cameron.mcinally(a)nyu.edu>, Thurston Dang <thurston(a)google.com> BUILD FAILED: failed build (failure) Step 5 (build-unified-tree) failure: build (failure) ... 378.972 [2600/10/4115] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/char-set.cpp.obj 380.006 [2599/10/4116] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Evaluate/CMakeFiles/FortranEvaluate.dir/cmake_pch.cxx.obj 380.596 [2598/10/4117] Building AArch64GenInstrInfo.inc... 381.268 [2597/10/4118] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/char-buffer.cpp.obj 382.326 [2596/10/4119] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/debug-parser.cpp.obj 382.422 [2595/10/4120] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/characters.cpp.obj 382.547 [2594/10/4121] Building AArch64GenSubtargetInfo.inc... 383.755 [2593/10/4122] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/instrumented-parser.cpp.obj 385.992 [2592/10/4123] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/message.cpp.obj 388.630 [2591/10/4124] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/preprocessor.cpp.obj FAILED: tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/preprocessor.cpp.obj ccache C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\llvm-arm64\current\bin\clang-cl.exe /nologo -TP -DFLANG_INCLUDE_TESTS=1 -DGTEST_HAS_RTTI=0 -DUNICODE -D_CRT_NONSTDC_NO_DEPRECATE -D_CRT_NONSTDC_NO_WARNINGS -D_CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE -D_CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -D_HAS_EXCEPTIONS=0 -D_SCL_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE -D_SCL_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS -D_UNICODE -D__STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS -D__STDC_FORMAT_MACROS -D__STDC_LIMIT_MACROS -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/lib/Parser -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/flang/lib/Parser -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/flang/include -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/include -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/include -IC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/llvm/include -imsvcC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/flang/../mlir/include -imsvcC:/Users/tcw g/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/mlir/include -imsvcC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/clang/include -imsvcC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/llvm/../clang/include /DWIN32 /D_WINDOWS /Zc:inline /Zc:__cplusplus /Oi /Brepro /bigobj /permissive- -Werror=unguarded-availability-new /W4 -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wmissing-field-initializers -Wimplicit-fallthrough -Wcovered-switch-default -Wno-noexcept-type -Wnon-virtual-dtor -Wdelete-non-virtual-dtor -Wsuggest-override -Wstring-conversion -Wmisleading-indentation -Wctad-maybe-unsupported /Gw -Wno-deprecated-copy -Wno-string-conversion -Wno-ctad-maybe-unsupported -Xclang -fno-pch-timestamp /O2 /Ob2 -std:c++17 -MD /EHs-c- /GR- -UNDEBUG /YuC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/cmake_pch.hxx /FpC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/ lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/./cmake_pch.cxx.pch /FIC:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/cmake_pch.hxx /showIncludes /Fotools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/preprocessor.cpp.obj /Fdtools\flang\lib\Parser\CMakeFiles\FortranParser.dir\FortranParser.pdb -c -- C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/llvm-project/flang/lib/Parser/preprocessor.cpp fatal error: file 'C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\flang-arm64-windows-msvc\llvm-project\llvm\include\llvm\Support\Compiler.h' has been modified since the precompiled header 'C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/./cmake_pch.cxx.pch' was built: size changed (was 26948, now 27102) note: please rebuild precompiled header 'C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/flang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/./cmake_pch.cxx.pch' 1 error generated. 392.025 [2591/9/4125] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/prescan.cpp.obj 393.052 [2591/8/4126] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/parsing.cpp.obj 393.434 [2591/7/4127] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/parse-tree.cpp.obj 395.861 [2591/6/4128] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/expr-parsers.cpp.obj 402.121 [2591/5/4129] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/io-parsers.cpp.obj 408.915 [2591/4/4130] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/openacc-parsers.cpp.obj 412.795 [2591/3/4131] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/executable-parsers.cpp.obj 425.616 [2591/2/4132] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/Fortran-parsers.cpp.obj 437.843 [2591/1/4133] Building CXX object tools/flang/lib/Parser/CMakeFiles/FortranParser.dir/openmp-parsers.cpp.obj ninja: build stopped: subcommand failed. Sincerely, LLVM Buildbot

4 months, 3 weeks

2
2
0 0

RE: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-14077-g6f64a600649a: 125 regressions on aarch64

by Eli Friedman

I guess the issue is the following: clang: ../llvm/llvm/lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64FrameLowering.cpp:2857: StackOffset llvm::AArch64FrameLowering::resolveFrameOffsetReference(const MachineFunction &, int64_t, bool, bool, Register &, bool, bool) const: Assertion `-ObjectOffset > (int64_t)AFI->getSVECalleeSavedStackSize() && "Math isn't correct for CSRs with FPAfterSVECalleeSaves"' failed. PLEASE submit a bug report to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/ and include the crash backtrace, preprocessed source, and associated run script. I'll try to have a patch tomorrow. Thanks, -Eli -----Original Message----- From: ci_notify(a)linaro.org <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> Sent: Saturday, June 7, 2025 10:41 PM To: ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com; itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com; t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com Cc: maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org; Eli Friedman <efriedma(a)quicinc.com> Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-14077-g6f64a600649a: 125 regressions on aarch64 WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-O0-debug, after: | commit llvmorg-21-init-14077-g6f64a600649a | Author: Eli Friedman <efriedma(a)quicinc.com> | Date: Mon Jun 2 18:28:23 2025 -0700 | | [AArch64] Initial compiler support for SVE unwind on Windows. (#138609) | | Most bits of this are straightforward: when we emit SVE instructions in | the prologue/epilogue, emit corresponding opcodes. | | ... 7 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 125 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/C/0003 ... | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/C/0003/Fujitsu-C-0003_0088.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/C/0003/Fujitsu-C-0003_0090.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/C/0003/Fujitsu-C-0003_0091.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/C/0003/Fujitsu-C-0003_0092.test | ... and 122 more | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled Used configuration : * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O0 -g" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1699. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1023… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1023… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1023… Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1023… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O0-debug-build/1022… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/6f64a600649a95141526043b170aa42…

4 months, 3 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-1247-gbdae7824cd9: 7 regressions on arm

by Jonathan Wakely

On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 at 18:17, <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-arm, after: > | commit gcc-16-1247-gbdae7824cd9 > | Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Wed Jun 4 15:53:20 2025 +0100 > | > | libstdc++: Optimize std::counting_semaphore for futex path > | > | Rename __semaphore_base to __semaphore_impl, because it's not used as a > | base class. Replace the three identical lambda expressions with a named > | class, __semaphore_impl::_Available, which stores the most recent > | ... 27 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 7 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running g++:g++.dg/modules/modules.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_b.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_b.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-6_b.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-7_b.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) > | ... and 3 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-1598. Please let us know if you have a fix. It should be fixed at r16-1270-g7407891a3d7c17 > > 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/3946/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/3946/artifact/ar… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3946/artifact/ar… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3946/artifact/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3945/artifact/ar… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/sha1… > > Full commit : See in git+ssh://linaroci@gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git

4 months, 4 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-427-g86627faec10d: 11 regressions on arm

by Jonathan Wakely

On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 at 02:50, <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 master-arm_eabi, after: > | commit gcc-16-427-g86627faec10d > | Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Fri Apr 25 21:09:18 2025 +0100 > | > | libstdc++: Rewrite atomic builtin checks [PR70560] > | > | Currently the GLIBCXX_ENABLE_ATOMIC_BUILTINS macro checks for a variety > | of __atomic built-ins for bool, short and int. If all those checks pass, > | then it defines _GLIBCXX_ATOMIC_BUILTINS and uses the definitions from > | ... 80 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 11 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running libstdc++:libstdc++-dg/conformance.exp ... > | FAIL: 19_diagnostics/stacktrace/current.cc -std=gnu++23 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: 19_diagnostics/stacktrace/current.cc -std=gnu++26 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: 19_diagnostics/stacktrace/entry.cc -std=gnu++23 (test for excess errors) > | FAIL: 19_diagnostics/stacktrace/entry.cc -std=gnu++26 (test for excess errors) > | ... and 7 more > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc master-arm_eabi > *configure and test flags:* --target arm-eabi > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1595. Please let us know if you have a fix. I've opened https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120567 for this. > > 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_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_eabi-build/1… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_eabi-build/1… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_eabi-build/1… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_eabi-build/1… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-arm_eabi-build/1… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/sha1… > > Full commit : https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=86627faec10da53d753280501…

4 months, 4 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-1041-g2da641d0170: 5105 regressions on master-thumb_m33_hard_eabi

by H.J. Lu

On Wed, Jun 4, 2025 at 10:39 PM <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 arm-eabi cortex-m33 hard, after: > | commit gcc-16-1041-g2da641d0170 > | Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools(a)gmail.com> > | Date: Sun Jun 1 09:29:48 2025 +0800 > | > | Move get_call_rtx_from to final.c > | > | Move get_call_rtx_from to final.c and call call_from_call_insn. > | > | PR other/120493 > | ... 8 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 5105 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/cmse/cmse.exp ... > | UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/arm/cmse/baseline/bitfield-4.c -mcpu=unset -march=armv8-m.base -mthumb -mfloat-abi=soft -O0 scan-assembler ands\tr0, r4 > | UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/arm/cmse/baseline/bitfield-4.c -mcpu=unset -march=armv8-m.base -mthumb -mfloat-abi=soft -O0 scan-assembler ands\tr1, r4 > | UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/arm/cmse/baseline/bitfield-4.c -mcpu=unset -march=armv8-m.base -mthumb -mfloat-abi=soft -O0 scan-assembler ands\tr2, r4 > | UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/arm/cmse/baseline/bitfield-4.c -mcpu=unset -march=armv8-m.base -mthumb -mfloat-abi=soft -O0 scan-assembler bl\t__gnu_cmse_nonsecure_call > | ... and 5101 more > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc arm-eabi -mthumb -march=armv8-m.main+dsp+fp -mtune=cortex-m33 -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=auto > *configure and test flags:* --target arm-eabi --disable-multilib --with-mode=thumb --with-cpu=cortex-m33 --with-float=hard --target_board=-mthumb/-march=armv8-m.main+dsp+fp/-mtune=cortex-m33/-mfloat-abi=hard/-mfpu=auto qemu-cpu=cortex-m33 > Please try this. -- H.J.

5 months

2
2
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-1028-g9739ae9384d: Failure on aarch64

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_kernel/gnu-master-aarch64-mainline-allmodconfig, after: | commit gcc-16-1028-g9739ae9384d | Author: Andrew Pinski <quic_apinski(a)quicinc.com> | Date: Thu May 29 23:50:08 2025 -0700 | | Have TODO_verify_* not set by any pass | | This is a follow up to the patch set starting at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2014-April/386650.html. | | Currently TODO_verify_{il,all} is set by a few passes as TODOs afterwards but | ... 32 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces Failure: | Results changed to | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # build_abe binutils: | -9 | # build_abe stage1: | -5 | # build_abe qemu: | -2 | # linux_n_obj: | 30 | # First few build errors in logs: | # 00:05:59 scripts/gcc-plugins/gcc-common.h:176:25: error: ‘TODO_verify_il’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TODO_verify_flow’? | # 00:05:59 scripts/gcc-plugins/gcc-common.h:176:25: error: ‘TODO_verify_il’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TODO_verify_flow’? | # 00:05:59 scripts/gcc-plugins/gcc-common.h:178:27: error: ‘TODO_verify_il’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TODO_verify_flow’? | # 00:06:00 scripts/gcc-plugins/gcc-common.h:177:26: error: ‘TODO_verify_il’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TODO_verify_flow’? | # 00:06:00 make[3]: *** [scripts/gcc-plugins/Makefile:54: scripts/gcc-plugins/latent_entropy_plugin.so] Error 1 | # 00:06:00 scripts/gcc-plugins/gcc-common.h:178:27: error: ‘TODO_verify_il’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TODO_verify_flow’? | # 00:06:00 scripts/gcc-plugins/gcc-common.h:176:25: error: ‘TODO_verify_il’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TODO_verify_flow’? | # 00:06:00 scripts/gcc-plugins/gcc-common.h:178:27: error: ‘TODO_verify_il’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘TODO_verify_flow’? | # 00:06:01 make[3]: *** [scripts/gcc-plugins/Makefile:54: scripts/gcc-plugins/stackleak_plugin.so] Error 1 | # 00:06:03 make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:461: scripts/gcc-plugins] Error 2 | | From | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # build_abe binutils: | -9 | # build_abe stage1: | -5 | # build_abe qemu: | -2 | # linux_n_obj: | 36872 | # linux build successful: | all Used configuration : tcwg_kernel/gnu-master-aarch64-mainline-allmodconfig We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1592. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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: Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_kernel--gnu-master-aarch64-mainline-allmodco… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_kernel--gnu-master-aarch64-mainline-allmodco… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/gcc/sha1… Full commit : https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=9739ae9384dd7cd3bb1c7683d…

5 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-13711-ga0d699a8e686: 2 regressions on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. We'll update the test. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-13711-ga0d699a8e686 > | Author: Slava Zakharin <szakharin(a)nvidia.com> > | Date: Wed May 28 17:18:04 2025 -0700 > | > | Reland "[flang] Added noalias attribute to function arguments. (#140803)" > | > | This helps to disambiguate accesses in the caller and the callee > | after LLVM inlining in some apps. I did not see any performance > | changes, but this is one step towards enabling other optimizations > | ... 14 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0122 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0122/Fujitsu-Fortran-0122_0045.test > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0122/Fujitsu-Fortran-0122_0048.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1691. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://gitlab.com/Linaro/tcwg/ci/interesting-commits/-/raw/master/llvm/sha… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a0d699a8e686cba99690cf28463d145…

5 months

1
0
0 0

RE: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-11733-g2d12d31f44ac: 3 regressions on aarch64

by Slava Zakharin

Hello, I think there was an error in bisecting these regressions. I can reproduce the same failure with commit 6dc6ca3302edadad7d4b195a05038995b84606d0, which happened before mine. Thanks, Slava -----Original Message----- From: ci_notify(a)linaro.org <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 9:10 PM To: ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com; itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com; t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com Cc: Slava Zakharin <szakharin(a)nvidia.com>; maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-11733-g2d12d31f44ac: 3 regressions on aarch64 [You don't often get email from ci_notify(a)linaro.org. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: | commit llvmorg-21-init-11733-g2d12d31f44ac | Author: Slava Zakharin <szakharin(a)nvidia.com> | Date: Mon May 12 18:33:47 2025 -0700 | | [flang] Propagate contiguous attribute through HLFIR. (#138797) | | This change allows marking more designators producing an opaque | box with 'contiguous' attribute, e.g. like in test1 case | in flang/test/HLFIR/propagate-contiguous-attribute.fir. | ... 5 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 3 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0105 ... | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0105/Fujitsu-Fortran-0105_0089.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0105/Fujitsu-Fortran-0105_0204.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0105/Fujitsu-Fortran-0105_0205.test | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled Used configuration : * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1686. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/2d12d31f44acac54d7b2858624cb8a1…

5 months, 1 week

3
3
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-12714-gd36028120a6e: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This regression is caused by a latent bug in the loop-interchange. I've confirmed https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140709 fixes the bug. We'll wait for merge of https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140709. You don't need to investigate this failure. Thanks. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-12714-gd36028120a6e > | Author: Sebastian Pop <spop(a)nvidia.com> > | Date: Wed May 21 08:27:39 2025 -0500 > | > | [flang] add -floop-interchange and enable it with opt levels (#140182) > | > | Enable the use of -floop-interchange from the flang driver. > | Enable in flang LLVM's loop interchange at levels -O2, -O3, -Ofast, and -Os. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0347 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0347/Fujitsu-Fortran-0347_0240.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1687. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/d36028120a6ef6346bfaafe82d4d1a2…

5 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-12430-g70501ed2f0f9: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-12430-g70501ed2f0f9 > | Author: Sam Tebbs <samuel.tebbs(a)arm.com> > | Date: Mon May 19 13:27:17 2025 +0100 > | > | [LoopVectorizer] Prune VFs based on plan register pressure (#132190) > | > | This PR moves the register usage checking to after the plans are > | created, so that any recipes that optimise register usage (such as > | partial reductions) can be properly costed and not have their VF pruned > | ... 3 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0340 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0340/Fujitsu-Fortran-0340_0076.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1684. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/70501ed2f0f9dc06baffa7ee124845e…

5 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-11722-gcf3242f3b0f6: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Hi, This failure is a false detection caused by a floating-point precision error in fast-math. Please ignore the mail. Sorry for the noise. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-11722-gcf3242f3b0f6 > | Author: Luke Lau <luke(a)igalia.com> > | Date: Tue May 13 02:11:55 2025 +0300 > | > | [InstCombine] Pull shuffles out of binops with splatted ops (#137948) > | > | Given a binary op on splatted vector and a splatted constant, > | InstCombine will normally pull the shuffle out in > | `InstCombinerImpl::foldVectorBinop`: > | ... 50 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0639 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0639/Fujitsu-Fortran-0639_0140.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1681. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/cf3242f3b0f6eec47786426777f6e0b…

5 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-372-g064cac730f8: 18 regressions on aarch64

by Sam James

See PR119930, PR120098, PR120101, PR120099.

6 months

1
0
0 0

Windows builder issues

by Aaron Ballman

It looks like https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/workers/149 is having problems: FAILED: bin/clang.exe C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmd.exe /C "cd . && C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\cmake\3.30.1\bin\cmake.exe -E vs_link_exe --intdir=tools\clang\tools\driver\CMakeFiles\clang.dir --rc=C:\PROGRA~2\WI3CF2~1\10\bin\100226~1.0\x64\rc.exe --mt=C:\PROGRA~2\WI3CF2~1\10\bin\100226~1.0\x64\mt.exe --manifests -- C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\llvm-arm64\current\bin\lld-link.exe /nologo @CMakeFiles\clang.rsp /out:bin\clang.exe /implib:lib\clang.lib /pdb:bin\clang.pdb /version:0.0 /machine:ARM64 /STACK:10000000 /INCREMENTAL:NO /subsystem:console && C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmd.exe /C "cd /D C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\clang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\clang\tools\driver && C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\cmake\3.30.1\bin\cmake.exe -E copy C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/clang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/bin/clang.exe C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/clang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/./bin/clang++.exe && cd /D C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\clang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\clang\tools\driver && C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\cmake\3.30.1\bin\cmake.exe -E copy C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/clang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/bin/clang.exe C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/clang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/./bin/clang-cl.exe && cd /D C:\Users\tcwg\llvm-worker\clang-arm64-windows-msvc\build\tools\clang\tools\driver && C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\cmake\3.30.1\bin\cmake.exe -E copy C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/clang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/bin/clang.exe C:/Users/tcwg/llvm-worker/clang-arm64-windows-msvc/build/./bin/clang-cpp.exe"" LINK: command "C:\Users\tcwg\scoop\apps\llvm-arm64\current\bin\lld-link.exe /nologo @CMakeFiles\clang.rsp /out:bin\clang.exe /implib:lib\clang.lib /pdb:bin\clang.pdb /version:0.0 /machine:ARM64 /STACK:10000000 /INCREMENTAL:NO /subsystem:console /MANIFEST:EMBED,ID=1" failed (exit code 1) with the following output: lld-link: error: failed to write output 'bin\clang.exe': permission denied Any chance you can look into it? Thanks! ~Aaron

6 months

2
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc patch #111247: 90 regressions on arm

by Stefan Liebler

Hi, For this V2-patch, I got the same "Operation not permitted" errors as for the V1 one: https://lists.linaro.org/archives/list/linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org/th… @Adhemerval: have you had a look? The only non-s390x changes of my patch are in: elf/Makefile elf/tst-glibc-hwcaps-cache.script => There the libmarkermod6 libraries are added. As I don't have an arm, I've checked on x86_64, that the testcase elf/tst-glibc-hwcaps-cache.c contains the libmarkermod6.so files in glibc-hwcaps/z13-z17 directories by adding a "ldconfig -p" to the test. Any idea why those "Operation not permitted" regressions hits my patch, but no others? Bye, Stefan On 4/30/25 20:19, 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 glibc_check master-arm, after: > | glibc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/111247 > | Author: Stefan Liebler <stli(a)linux.ibm.com> > | Date: Tue Apr 29 13:28:58 2025 +0200 > | > | [PATCH v2] S390: Add new s390 platform z17. > | > | Hi, > | need a V2: stfle_bits on stack in init_cpu_features_no_tunables() needs to be > | zeroed before usage. If there is no more feedback, I will commit this patch shortly. > | ... 41 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 84977600dac math: Fix UB on sinpif (BZ 32925) > > Produces 90 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running glibc:debug ... > | FAIL: debug/tst-fortify-syslog > | Running glibc:dirent ... > | FAIL: dirent/tst-readdir-long > | FAIL: dirent/tst-readdir-zero-inode > | ... and 99 more > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_glibc_check master-arm > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > > 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_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3574/artif… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3574/artif… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3574/artif… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3574/artif… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/2743/artifact/… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files.

6 months

2
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb patch #111028: 2 regressions on arm

by Tom de Vries

On 4/30/25 06:18, 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 gdb_check master-arm, after: > | gdb patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/111028 > | Author: Tom de Vries <tdevries(a)suse.de> > | Date: Fri Apr 25 17:13:32 2025 +0200 > | > | [PATCH v2] [gdb/testsuite] Simplify gdb.tui/tui-layout-asm.exp > | > | On x86_64-cygwin, with test-case gdb.tui/tui-layout-asm.exp I run into: > | ... > | WARNING: The following failure is probably due to the TUI window > | ... 49 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 48d0ac705c4 Handle base type without DW_AT_byte_size > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gdb:gdb.python/py-missing-objfile.exp ... > | FAIL: gdb.python/py-missing-objfile.exp: initial sanity check: whatis global_exec_var > | FAIL: gdb.python/py-missing-objfile.exp: initial sanity check: whatis global_lib_var > The FAILs are obviously unrelated to the patch which modifies a different test-case. But anyway, this a know PR ( https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32445 ). I've just committed a fix. Thanks, - Tom > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gdb_check master-arm > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > > 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_gdb_check--master-arm-precommit/4439/artifac… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-precommit/4439/artifac… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-precommit/4439/artifac… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-precommit/4439/artifac… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm-build/2666/artifact/ar… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files.

6 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-16-142-g01e5ef3e8b9: 2 regressions on arm

by Tomasz Kaminski

Hi, I have just pushed the following fix on trunk, that fixes a similar issue for 32bit x86_64. https://gcc.gnu.org/cgit/gcc/commit/?id=2ca5725e104d432317a44ad45183a4f555d… Please let me know if the build failure is addressed. Regards, Tomasz On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 5:14 AM <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-arm, after: > | commit gcc-16-142-g01e5ef3e8b9 > | Author: Tomasz Kamiński <tkaminsk(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Wed Apr 23 13:17:09 2025 +0200 > | > | libstdc++: Minimalize temporary allocations when width is > specified [PR109162] > | > | When width parameter is specified for formatting range, tuple or > escaped > | presentation of string, we used to format characters to temporary > string, > | and write produce sequence padded according to the spec. However, > once the > | ... 53 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running libstdc++:libstdc++-dg/conformance.exp ... > | FAIL: std/format/debug.cc -std=gnu++23 execution test > | FAIL: std/format/debug.cc -std=gnu++26 execution test > > 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-1571. Please let us know if you > have a fix. > > 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/3771/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/3771/artifact/ar… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3771/artifact/ar… > > Current build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3771/artifact/ar… > Reference build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3770/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=01e5ef3e8b91288f5d387a277…

6 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb-16-branchpoint-1244-g5ea1eec52f4: 4 regressions 4 fixes on arm

by Tom de Vries

On 4/26/25 22:38, 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 master-arm, after: > | commit gdb-16-branchpoint-1244-g5ea1eec52f4 > | Author: Tom de Vries <tdevries(a)suse.de> > | Date: Wed Apr 9 08:59:42 2025 +0200 > | > | [gdb/tdep] Handle ldaex and stlex in {thumb,arm}_deal_with_atomic_sequence_raw > | > | The Linaro CI reported a regression [1] in test-case > | gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp due to commit 674d4856730 ("[gdb/testsuite] Fix > | gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp with glibc 2.41"). > | ... 100 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 4 regressions 4 fixes: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gdb:gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp ... > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=off: check_pc_after_cross_syscall: single step over fork final pc > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=off: pc after stepi matches insn addr after syscall > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=on: check_pc_after_cross_syscall: single step over fork final pc > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=on: pc after stepi matches insn addr after syscall > | > | fixes.sum: > | Running gdb:gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp ... > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=off: continue to syscall insn fork (the program exited) > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=off: find syscall insn in fork > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=off: single step over fork (the program is no longer running) > | FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: fork: displaced=off: break on syscall insn > Hi, I've looked at this, and AFAICT this is PR32817 ( https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32817 ). This is unrelated to the mentioned commit. Thanks, - Tom > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb 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-1570. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1993/… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1993/… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1993/… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1993/… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gdb--master-arm-build/1991/… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : 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=5ea1eec52f47f…

6 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-275-ge04afb7177: Failure on aarch64

by ci_notify＠linaro.org

Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In master-aarch64, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-275-ge04afb7177 | Author: H. Peter Anvin <hpa(a)zytor.com> | Date: Fri Apr 25 07:30:59 2025 +0200 | | linux/termio: remove <termio.h> and struct termio | | The <termio.h> interface is absolutely ancient: it was obsoleted by | <termios.h> already in the first version of POSIX (1988) and thus | predates the very first version of Linux. Unfortunately, some constant | ... 15 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces Failure: | Results changed to | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe stage1 --: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 3 | # build_abe glibc: | 4 | # build_abe stage2 --: | # FAILED | # build_abe gdb: | # build_abe qemu: | # First few build errors in logs: | # 00:08:58 /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cpp:489:31: error: invalid application of ‘sizeof’ to incomplete type ‘__sanitizer::termio’ | # 00:08:58 make[4]: *** [Makefile:627: sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.lo] Error 1 | # 00:08:58 make[3]: *** [Makefile:533: all-recursive] Error 1 | # 00:08:58 make[2]: *** [Makefile:420: all] Error 2 | # 00:08:58 make[1]: *** [Makefile:12800: all-target-libsanitizer] Error 2 | # 00:08:58 make: *** [Makefile:1064: all] Error 2 | | From | # reset_artifacts: | -10 | # true: | 0 | # build_abe binutils: | 1 | # build_abe stage1 --: | 2 | # build_abe linux: | 3 | # build_abe glibc: | 4 | # build_abe stage2 --: | 5 | # build_abe gdb: | 6 | # build_abe qemu: | 7 Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_cross_build master-aarch64 *configure and test flags:* --target aarch64-linux-gnu We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1569. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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 * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1084/a… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1084/a… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1084/a… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_build--master-aarch64-build/1083/a… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/glibc/… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=e04afb71771710cdc602…

6 months, 1 week

2
1
0 0

Adjust 'libgomp.c++/target-exceptions-pr118794-1.C' for 'targetm.arm_eabi_unwinder' [PR118794] (was: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-15-9463-gaa3e72f9430: 2 regressions on arm)

by Thomas Schwinge

Hi! On 2025-04-17T18:15:50+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 bootstrap_check master-arm-check_bootstrap, after: > | commit gcc-15-9463-gaa3e72f9430 > | Author: Thomas Schwinge <tschwinge(a)baylibre.com> > | Date: Thu Mar 27 23:06:37 2025 +0100 > | > | Add test cases for exception handling constructs in dead code for GCN, nvptx target and OpenMP 'target' offloading [PR118794] > | > | PR target/118794 > | gcc/testsuite/ > | * g++.target/gcn/exceptions-pr118794-1.C: New. > | ... 7 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 2 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running libgomp:libgomp.c++/c++.exp ... > | FAIL: libgomp.c++/target-exceptions-pr118794-1.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized "gimple_call <__builtin_eh_pointer, " 1 > | FAIL: libgomp.c++/target-exceptions-pr118794-1.C scan-tree-dump-times optimized "gimple_call <__builtin_unwind_resume, " 1 Ah, sorry for that. This is due to 'targetm.arm_eabi_unwinder', as per: gcc/config/arm/arm.cc:#define TARGET_ARM_EABI_UNWINDER true gcc/config/c6x/c6x.cc:#define TARGET_ARM_EABI_UNWINDER true ..., which for ARM is conditional to '#if ARM_UNWIND_INFO' (defined in 'gcc/config/arm/bpabi.h', used for various GCC configurations), and for C6x unconditional. This gets us: --- target-exceptions-pr118794-1.C.269t.optimized +++ target-exceptions-pr118794-1.C.270t.optimized [...] __attribute__((omp declare target)) void f () [...] gimple_call <__dt_comp , NULL, &c> - gimple_call <__builtin_eh_pointer, _7, 2> - gimple_call <__builtin_unwind_resume, NULL, _7> + gimple_call <__builtin_cxa_end_cleanup, NULL> } [...] There doesn't appear to be an effective-target keyword for 'targetm.arm_eabi_unwinder' specifically, do we need to add one? Or, other test cases appear to use effective-target 'arm_eabi' to disambiguate the two variants; is that the right thing to use here, too? (..., plus 'tic6x-*-*' in this case?) OK to push the attached "Adjust 'libgomp.c++/target-exceptions-pr118794-1.C' for 'targetm.arm_eabi_unwinder' [PR118794]"? (Could Arm/C6x maintainers please test this for me?) Grüße Thomas > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_bootstrap_check master-arm-check_bootstrap > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1562. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_bootstrap_check--master-arm-check_bootstrap-… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_bootstrap_check--master-arm-check_bootstrap-… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_bootstrap_check--master-arm-check_bootstrap-… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_bootstrap_check--master-arm-check_bootstrap-… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_bootstrap_check--master-arm-check_bootstrap-… > > 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=aa3e72f943032e5f074b2bd2f…

6 months, 2 weeks

2
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc patch #110503: 90 regressions on arm

by Stefan Liebler

Hi, I've looked into tests.log.1.xz and there are plenty of "Operation not permitted" errors. I don't think that this has something to do with my patch? Can you please check on your side, if there was a change/issue on the build system? Bye, Stefan On 4/16/25 13:32, 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 glibc_check master-arm, after: > | glibc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/110503 > | Author: Stefan Liebler <stli(a)linux.ibm.com> > | Date: Tue Apr 15 16:52:17 2025 +0200 > | > | [PATCH] S390: Add new s390 platform z17. > | > | The glibc-hwcaps subdirectories are extended by "z17". Libraries are loaded if > | the z17 facility bits are active: > | - Miscellaneous-instruction-extensions facility 4 > | ... 35 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | ceeffd970c5 aarch64: Add back non-temporal load/stores from oryon-1's memset > > Produces 90 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running glibc:debug ... > | FAIL: debug/tst-fortify-syslog > | Running glibc:dirent ... > | FAIL: dirent/tst-readdir-long > | FAIL: dirent/tst-readdir-zero-inode > | ... and 99 more > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_glibc_check master-arm > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > > 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_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3528/artif… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3528/artif… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3528/artif… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-precommit/3528/artif… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_glibc_check--master-arm-build/2681/artifact/… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files.

6 months, 2 weeks

2
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-8019-g0ae9bb96d5af: 86 regressions 14 fixes on aarch64

by Peter Klausler

The HTML links in your mail aren’t usable in my locked-down corporate e-mail environment. If you could just send me a list of the names of the 83 failing Fujitsu tests, I’ll look at them immediately. (The initial ones that are quoted in the mail are working now with llvm-project/main, but I’d like to check the others.) From: ci_notify(a)linaro.org <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> Date: Monday, April 14, 2025 at 20:36 To: ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com <ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com>, itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com <itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com>, t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com <t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com> Cc: maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org <maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org>, Peter Klausler <pklausler(a)nvidia.com> Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-8019-g0ae9bb96d5af: 86 regressions 14 fixes on aarch64 External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_vla-mpipeliner-stack_arrays, after: | commit llvmorg-21-init-8019-g0ae9bb96d5af | Author: Peter Klausler <pklausler(a)nvidia.com> | Date: Wed Apr 9 12:30:33 2025 -0700 | | [flang][OpenMP] Fix regression in !$\ continuation (#134756) | | A recent patch that obviated the need to use -fopenmp when using the | compiler to preprocess in -E mode broke a case of Fortran line | continuation when using OpenMP conditional compilation lines (!$\) when | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 86 regressions 14 fixes: | | regressions.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/1008 ... | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/1008/Fujitsu-Fortran-1008_0001.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/1008/Fujitsu-Fortran-1008_0002.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/1008/Fujitsu-Fortran-1008_0006.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/1008/Fujitsu-Fortran-1008_0008.test | ... and 84 more | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled | | fixes.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0213 ... | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0213/Fujitsu-Fortran-0213_0029.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0213/Fujitsu-Fortran-0213_0023.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0213/Fujitsu-Fortran-0213_0018.test | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0213/Fujitsu-Fortran-0213_0024.test | ... and 10 more | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled Used configuration : * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG -fstack-arrays" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" We track this bug report under https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro.at…<https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1665>. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_…> The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_…> The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_…> Fujitsu testsuite : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…<https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/> Current build : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_…> Reference build : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fci.linaro…<https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_…> Instruction to reproduce the build : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit-us.li…<https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s…> Full commit : https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0ae9bb96d5af47a2426596dbd0c35e3…>

6 months, 2 weeks

2
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-7332-g3295970d846b: 1 regression on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Dear contributor, This FAIL is a floating-point precision error. Please ignore this mail. We'll update the test. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-7332-g3295970d846b > | Author: Iris <0.0(a)owo.li> > | Date: Thu Apr 3 14:34:09 2025 +0800 > | > | [ConstantFolding] Add support for `sinh` and `cosh` intrinsics in constant folding (#132671) > | > | Closes #132503. > > Produces 1 regression: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0360 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0360/Fujitsu-Fortran-0360_0286.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1653. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vla-build… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/3295970d846b0d820b863f9eeac559b…

6 months, 4 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR85836: Implement the F2018 reduce intrinsic

by Christophe Lyon

Hi! On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 19:22, Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.thomas(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Andre, > > Thanks for the review - I'll act on the points that you raised. > > The Linaro people reported a failure in reduce_1.f90 execution, which I believe is due to incorrect casting of 'dim' and a wrong specification of its kind. I am waiting to hear back from them as to whether or not I have fixed the failure. > Sorry I notice this message just today, so it's a bit outdated... I've looked at bugzilla, so I've noticed that the are proper bug reports about this now (and I've just checked, the problem is still present on arm). When you say you are "waiting to hear back from them as to whether or not I have fixed the failure", did you contact us directly? (I'm trying to understand if we missed your message, or how we could improve communication). Thanks, Christophe > Cheers > > Paul > > > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 12:39, Andre Vehreschild <vehre(a)gmx.de> wrote: >> >> Hi Paul, >> >> I took a look at your patch and think I found some improvements needed. In >> >> +bool >> +gfc_check_reduce (gfc_expr *array, gfc_expr *operation, gfc_expr *dim, >> + gfc_expr *mask, gfc_expr *identity, gfc_expr *ordered) >> +{ >> >> ... >> >> + if (formal->sym->attr.allocatable || formal->sym->attr.allocatable >> + || formal->sym->attr.pointer || formal->sym->attr.pointer >> + || formal->sym->attr.optional || formal->sym->attr.optional >> + || formal->sym->ts.type == BT_CLASS || formal->sym->ts.type == BT_CLASS) >> + { >> + gfc_error ("Each argument of OPERATION at %L shall be a scalar, " >> + "non-allocatable, non-pointer, non-polymorphic and " >> + "nonoptional", &operation->where); >> + return false; >> + } >> >> The if is only looking at the first formal argument. The right-hand sides >> of the || miss a ->next-> to look at the second formal argument, right? >> >> May be you also want to extend the tests!? >> >> Without having looked at it, but can't you extract the whole block of >> >> + if (array->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER) >> + { >> + unsigned long actual_size, formal_size1, formal_size2, result_size; >> ... >> + return false; >> + } >> + } >> >> and share it with the checks for co_reduce? I figure way to many DRY principle >> violations are in gfortran. So when we can start this, why not do it? And a >> call to a routine, like check_char_arg_conformance() speaks way better, then >> having to read all that code ;-) >> >> In gfc_resolve_reduce() identity and ordered are marked as UNUSED. Should these >> not a least be resolved? >> >> Please run contrib/check_GNU_style on your patch. It reports several issues >> (haven't look into their validity). >> >> In the Changelog: >> >> - (gfc_check_rename): Add prototype for intrinsic with 6 arguments. >> + * gfortran.h: Add prototype for intrinsic with 6 arguments. >> >> s/discription/description/ >> >> I also encountered that nit with the executable stack when working in >> OpenCoarrays, but haven't had time (or desire) to look into it. I will put >> myself into CC of the pr Jerry mentioned. >> >> Besides the mentions above, this looks good to me. >> >> Thanks for the patch and >> >> Regards, >> Andre >> >> >> >> On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 17:26:55 +0000 >> Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.thomas(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi All, >> > >> > This version of the REDUCE intrinsic patch has evolved somewhat since the >> > posting on 2nd March. The most important changes are to the wrapper >> > function and the addition of two testsuite entries. >> > >> > The wrapper function now effects: >> > subroutine wrapper (a, b, c) >> > type_of_ARRAY, intent(inout) :: a, c >> > type_of_ARRAY, intent(inout), optional :: b >> > if (present (b)) then >> > c = OPERATION (a,b ) >> > else >> > c = a >> > end if >> > end subroutine >> > >> > The reason for wrapping OPERATION in a subroutine is to allow pointer >> > arithmetic to be used throughout in the library function. The only thing >> > that needs to be known about the type and kind of ARRAY is the element >> > size. The second branch in the wrapper allows deep copies to be done in the >> > library function, such that derived types with allocatable components do >> > not leak memory. This is needed at the final step of the algorithm to copy >> > the result from each iteration to the result and then nullify it. >> > >> > This is undoubtedly a bit heavy going for intrinsic types and so, one day >> > soon I will possibly do a bit of M4ery. That said, the present version >> > works for all types of ARRAY and I worry a bit about how much this >> > intrinsic will be used. Thoughts? >> > >> > A slight niggle is the linker error that comes up if compiled without any >> > optimization: >> > /usr/bin/ld: warning: /tmp/cc9cx9Rw.o: requires executable stack (because >> > the .note.GNU-stack section is executable) >> > I think that this is unlikely to present a security issue, however, since >> > it disappears at -O1, I went through each of the options triggered by -O1 >> > but couldn't make it go away. Does anybody know why this is? >> > >> > Regtests OK with FC41/x86_64 - OK for mainline? >> > >> > Regards >> > >> > Paul >> >> >> -- >> Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de

7 months

2
4
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb patch #109371: 5 regressions on aarch64

by Martin Simmons

>>>>> On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 23:58:18 +0000 (UTC), ci notify said: > ... > In gdb_check master-aarch64, after: > | gdb patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/109371 > ... > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gdb_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_gdb_check--master-aarch64-precommit/4627/art… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-aarch64-precommit/4627/art… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-aarch64-precommit/4627/art… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-aarch64-precommit/4627/art… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-aarch64-build/2461/artifac… In https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gdb_check--master-aarch64-precommit/4627/art… it appears that the "info set" test started at line 1159 and failed with FAIL: gdb.base/default.exp: info set (timeout) at line 1533. Then a few more tests failed with timeout and finally over 100 tests failed with no obvious reason. Was this caused by a problem on the CI machine?

7 months

3
3
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 5 patches in binutils: Success on arm

by Jens Remus

Hello! On 03.04.2025 14:32, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. Could you please help me understand what the detected problem(s) are? The mail subject suggests that everything may actually be fine? > In binutils_build master-arm, after: > | 5 patches in binutils > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/109718 > | cde90675110 [PATCH 5/8] s390: Represent FP without RA saved in SFrame > | fa5be46ad1a [PATCH 4/8] s390: Represent FP/RA saved in register in SFrame > | b029a0bbe60 [PATCH 3/8] s390: Initial support to generate .sframe from CFI directives in assembler > | d40f1518ae8 [PATCH 2/8] s390: Explicitly list linker dump tests > | 45da7966615 [PATCH 1/8] sframe: Ignore section padding when converting endianness > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | abf215a338f ld/testsuite/ld-pe: Escape dots in regular expressions My series consists of 8 patches. Could it be that they appeared in Patchworks in a bad order, e.g. due to in what order my company's mail server delivered them to the list, and this now confuses the CI? https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/binutils/list/?series=45805 > Produces Success: > | Results changed to > | # reset_artifacts: > | -10 > | # true: > | 0 > | # build_abe binutils: > | 1 > | > | From > | # reset_artifacts: > | -10 > | # true: > | 0 > | # build_abe binutils: > | 1 The results appear to be unchanged to me. > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_binutils_build master-arm > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > > 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 > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-precommit/3765/ar… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-precommit/3765/ar… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-precommit/3765/ar… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-build/2375/artifa… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files. Thanks and regards, Jens -- Jens Remus Linux on Z Development (D3303) +49-7031-16-1128 Office jremus(a)de.ibm.com IBM IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH; Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Wolfgang Wendt; Geschäftsführung: David Faller; Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen; Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 IBM Data Privacy Statement: https://www.ibm.com/privacy/

7 months

2
1
0 0

[Linaro-TCWG-CI] glibc-2.41.9000-229-g7f163bd2106: 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. In master-arm, after: | commit glibc-2.41.9000-229-g7f163bd2106 | Author: Joseph Myers <josmyers(a)redhat.com> | Date: Tue Apr 1 12:44:26 2025 +0000 | | Update syscall lists for Linux 6.14 | | Linux 6.14 has no new syscalls. Update the version number in | syscall-names.list to reflect that it is still current for 6.14. | | ... 1 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 1 regressions: | | regressions.sum: | Running glibc:misc ... | FAIL: misc/tst-glibcsyscalls Used configuration : *CI config* tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc 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-1557. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/112… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/112… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/112… Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/112… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_glibc--master-arm-build/111… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/glibc/… Full commit : https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=7f163bd2106f96e2925e…

7 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-15-9030-g78e0cf06c81: 5 regressions 4 improvements on master-thumb_m33_hard_eabi

by Sam James

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 arm-eabi cortex-m33 hard, after: > | commit gcc-15-9030-g78e0cf06c81 > | Author: Sam James <sam(a)gentoo.org> > | Date: Sat Mar 29 21:09:25 2025 +0000 > | > | testsuite: arm: fixup more dg-final syntax > | > | ... as Richard E mentioned on the ML. Followup to r15-8956-ge90d6c2639c392. > | > | gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > | ... 2 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 5 regressions 4 improvements: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/short-vfp-1.c scan-assembler-times sxth\\tr[0-9]+,r[0-9]+ 2 > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/short-vfp-1.c scan-assembler-times vcvt\\.f32\\.s32\\ts[0-9]+,s[0-9]+ 2 > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/short-vfp-1.c scan-assembler-times vcvt\\.s32\\.f32\\ts[0-9]+,s[0-9]+ 2 > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/short-vfp-1.c scan-assembler-times vmov\\tr[0-9]+,s[0-9]+ 2 > | ... and 1 more This one may need an ARM person to take a look at. (The issue was latent, and the test wasn't being run fully before.)

7 months

2
1
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-6480-g529c5b71c608: 3 regressions 2 improvements on aarch64

by Kajetan Puchalski

Hi, I'm not familiar with the test suite in question, does it seem related to the test issue addressed in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133128? Or does it seem like it's caused by enabling the slp-vectorizer pass in the O3 pipeline where it was not enabled previously? ________________________________ Von: ci_notify(a)linaro.org <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> Gesendet: Freitag, März 28, 2025 1:21:30 AM An: ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com <ohno.yasuyuki(a)fujitsu.com>; itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com <itou.tetsuya(a)fujitsu.com>; t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com <t-kawashima(a)fujitsu.com> Cc: Kajetan Puchalski <Kajetan.Puchalski(a)arm.com>; maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org <maxim.kuvyrkov(a)linaro.org> Betreff: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-6480-g529c5b71c608: 3 regressions 2 improvements on aarch64 Dear contributor, Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_vla-mpipeliner-stack_arrays, after: | commit llvmorg-21-init-6480-g529c5b71c608 | Author: Kajetan Puchalski <kajetan.puchalski(a)arm.com> | Date: Wed Mar 26 16:10:35 2025 +0000 | | [flang] Add -f[no-]slp-vectorize flags (#132801) | | Add -f[no-]slp-vectorize to the flang driver. | Add corresponding -fvectorize-slp to the flang frontend. | | ... 6 lines of the commit log omitted. Produces 3 regressions 2 improvements: | | regressions.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0105 ... | NOEXE: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0105/Fujitsu-Fortran-0105_0223.test | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0631 ... | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0631/Fujitsu-Fortran-0631_0051.test | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0631/Fujitsu-Fortran-0631_0054.test | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one | | improvements.sum: | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0347 ... | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0347/Fujitsu-Fortran-0347_0083.test | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0675 ... | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0675/Fujitsu-Fortran-0675_0315.test | # "NOEXE" means : the test program cannot be compiled | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one Used configuration : * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -mcpu=neoverse-v1 -msve-vector-bits=scalable -mllvm -scalable-vectorization=preferred -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -mllvm -aarch64-enable-pipeliner -mllvm -pipeliner-mve-cg -DNDEBUG -fstack-arrays" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1644. Please let us know if you have a fix. 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-O3-neoverse_v1-sve_… Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/529c5b71c608c18141432e6fd0ae892… 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.

7 months

3
4
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-6604-gc6406c8dba33: 1 regressions on aarch64

by Takahiro Kawashima (Fujitsu)

Dear contributor, This FAIL is a floating-point precision error caused by the -ffast-math flag. Please ignore this mail. We'll update the test. > Dear contributor, > > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. > > In tcwg_flang_test/main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-lld, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-6604-gc6406c8dba33 > | Author: David Green <david.green(a)arm.com> > | Date: Thu Mar 27 17:25:02 2025 +0000 > | > | [AArch64] Add getVectorInstrCost Codesize costs handling. (#130946) > | > | We have a lot of missing Codesize costs for vector operations. This > | patch starts things off by adding codesize costs for getVectorInstrCost, > | returning a single cost instead of the VectorInsertExtractBaseCost > | ... 2 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 1 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running test-suite:Fujitsu/Fortran/0351 ... > | FAIL: test-suite :: Fujitsu/Fortran/0351/Fujitsu-Fortran-0351_0105.test > | # "FAIL" means : the execution of the compiled binary failed / output of the binary differs from the expected one > > Used configuration : > * Toolchain : cmake -G Ninja ../llvm/llvm "-DLLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS=clang;lld;flang;openmp;clang-tools-extra" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_ENABLE_ASSERTIONS=True -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=../llvm-install "-DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=AArch64" -DCLANG_DEFAULT_LINKER=lld > * Testsuite : export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu$\{LD_LIBRARY_PATH:+:$\LD_LIBRARY_PATH} > cmake -GNinja -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang" -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/clang++" -DCMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER="$\WORKSPACE/llvm-install/bin/flang-new" -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS= -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DCMAKE_Fortran_FLAGS_RELEASE="-O3 -ffast-math -march=armv8.4-a+sve -msve-vector-bits=256 -mllvm -treat-scalable-fixed-error-as-warning=false -flto -fuse-ld=lld -DNDEBUG" -DTEST_SUITE_FORTRAN=ON -DTEST_SUITE_SUBDIRS=Fujitsu "$\WORKSPACE/test/test-suite" > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/LLVM-1647. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Fujitsu testsuite : https://github.com/fujitsu/compiler-test-suite/ > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_flang_test--main-aarch64-Ofast-sve_vls-lto-l… > > Instruction to reproduce the build : https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/c6406c8dba33d4cf8495257f70f52a2…

7 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #109240: 2 regressions 2 improvements on arm

by Christophe Lyon

On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 at 22:07, <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-arm, after: > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/109240 > | Author: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha(a)arm.com> > | Date: Wed Mar 26 17:19:11 2025 +0000 > | > | [PATCH] arm: don't vectorize fmaxf() unless unsafe math opts are enabled > | > | This test has presumably been failing since vectorization was enabled > | at -O2. I suspect part of the reason this wasn't picked up sooner is > | that the test is a hybrid execution/scan-assembler test and the > | ... 29 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 876a521a198 OpenMP: Fix declaration in append-args-interop.c test case > > Produces 2 regressions 2 improvements: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/vect-fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vmaxnm.f32\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 1 > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/vect-fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vminnm.f32\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 1 > | > | improvements.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vmaxnm.f32\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+ 1 > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vminnm.f32\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+ 1 > Hi Richard, I suspect the scripts were confused because there were some bugs in dg-directives during a few days, leading to random Tcl errors. You've committed your patch by now anyway, just mentioning in case you are confused. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience, Christophe > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gcc_check master-arm > *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > > 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-precommit/11651/artifa… > 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-precommit/11651/artifa… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-precommit/11651/artifa… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-precommit/11651/artifa… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3611/artifact/ar… > > Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update > generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the > master files.

7 months

2
2
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-15-8965-gb631ff45f23: 2 regressions 2 improvements on arm

by Richard Earnshaw (lists)

On 29/03/2025 23:18, 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 master-arm, after: > | commit gcc-15-8965-gb631ff45f23 > | Author: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha(a)arm.com> > | Date: Wed Mar 26 15:56:18 2025 +0000 > | > | arm: don't vectorize fmaxf() unless unsafe math opts are enabled > | > | This test has presumably been failing since vectorization was enabled > | at -O2. I suspect part of the reason this wasn't picked up sooner is > | that the test is a hybrid execution/scan-assembler test and the > | ... 29 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 2 regressions 2 improvements: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/vect-fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vmaxnm.f32\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 1 > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/vect-fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vminnm.f32\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 1 > | Fixed with r15-9064-gf30e180194bfbc R. > | improvements.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vminnm.f32\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+ 1 > | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times vmaxnm.f32\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+ 1 > > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc master-arm > *configure and test flags:* --target arm-linux-gnueabihf > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1553. Please let us know if you have a fix. > > 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_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/1998/a… > The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/1998/a… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/1998/a… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/1998/a… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_cross_check_gcc--master-arm-build/1997/a… > > 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=b631ff45f231db55b28b4c92c…

7 months

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-15-8956-ge90d6c2639c: 8 regressions on aarch64

by Sam James

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 gcc_check master-aarch64, after: > | commit gcc-15-8956-ge90d6c2639c > | Author: Sam James <sam(a)gentoo.org> > | Date: Thu Mar 27 00:21:43 2025 +0000 > | > | testsuite: more (mostly cosmetic) dg- whitespace fixes > | > | Some of these are harmless but still inconsistent (and asking for trouble > | given it may give people the wrong idea about similar "style"). > | > | ... 9 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 8 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running gcc:gcc.target/aarch64/aarch64.exp ... > | ERROR: tcl error code NONE > | ERROR: tcl error sourcing gcc.target/aarch64/aarch64.exp. > | UNRESOLVED: testcase gcc.target/aarch64/aarch64.exp' aborted due to Tcl error > | ERROR: unmatched open brace in list > | ... and 5 more Should be fixed with r15-8981-g176c7a2f751e04, thanks!

7 months

2
1
0 0

[committed] gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/append-args-8.C: Fix scan-dump-tree (was: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-15-8972-g7e286b56545: 3 regressions on aarch64)

by Tobias Burnus

The tree dump had bogus tailing numbers: interop.[0-9]+3, interop.[0-9]+2 This happened to work with x86-64 (-m32, -m64) but not with aarch64. I committed inr15-9033-ge0886d8ad4c519 the obvious fix: remove the 3 and 2 after the '+' Tobias ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > In gcc_check master-aarch64, after: > | commit gcc-15-8972-g7e286b56545 > > We track this bug report underhttps://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1554. Please let us know if you have a fix.

7 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-21-init-6198-g9694844d7e36: Failure on aarch64

by Nathan Chancellor

On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 03:28:46PM +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. > > In tcwg_kernel/llvm-master-aarch64-stable-allmodconfig, after: > | commit llvmorg-21-init-6198-g9694844d7e36 > | Author: Henry Jiang <h243jian(a)uwaterloo.ca> > | Date: Mon Mar 24 09:49:31 2025 -0400 > | > | Reland "[Transforms] LoopIdiomRecognize recognize strlen and wcslen #108985" (#132572) > | > | Reland https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108985 > | > | Extend `LoopIdiomRecognize` to find and replace loops of the form > | ... 12 lines of the commit log omitted. Thanks a lot for the report. I sent the third version of the patchset that should resolve this issue this morning so I hope it will be moved on soon: https://lore.kernel.org/20250328-string-add-wcslen-for-llvm-opt-v3-0-a180b4… Cheers, Nathan

7 months, 1 week

1
0
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain