- linaro-toolchain - lists.linaro.org

[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

1 day, 22 hours

1
0
0 0

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

by Sam James

See PR119930, PR120098, PR120101, PR120099.

1 week

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

1 week, 1 day

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.

1 week, 4 days

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.

1 week, 6 days

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…

2 weeks

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…

2 weeks, 2 days

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…

2 weeks, 4 days

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…

3 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.

3 weeks, 5 days

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…>

4 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…

1 month

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

1 month, 1 week

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?

1 month, 1 week

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/

1 month, 1 week

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…

1 month, 1 week

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.)

1 month, 1 week

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.

1 month, 1 week

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…

1 month, 1 week

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.

1 month, 1 week

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…

1 month, 1 week

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!

1 month, 1 week

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.

1 month, 2 weeks

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

1 month, 2 weeks

1
0
0 0

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-15-8947-g8ed2d5d219e: 5 regressions on master-thumb_m23_soft_eabi

by Christophe Lyon

Hi, On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 14:24, <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-m23 soft, after: > | commit gcc-15-8947-g8ed2d5d219e > | Author: Jørgen Kvalsvik <j(a)lambda.is> > | Date: Tue Jun 4 14:13:22 2024 +0200 > | > | Add prime path coverage to gcc/gcov > | > | This patch adds prime path coverage to gcc/gcov. First, a quick > | introduction to path coverage, before I explain a bit on the pieces of > | the patch. > | ... 404 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Produces 5 regressions: > | > | regressions.sum: > | Running g++:g++.dg/gcov/gcov.exp ... > | FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-22.C -std=gnu++17 gcov failed: spawn failed > | FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-22.C -std=gnu++26 gcov failed: spawn failed > | FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-22.C -std=gnu++98 gcov failed: spawn failed > | Running gcc:gcc.misc-tests/gcov.exp ... > | ... and 2 more > I've given a quick look at the logs, and gcov-22.C says: spawn -ignore SIGHUP /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/builds/destdir/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/gcov --prime-paths gcov-22.C FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-22.C -std=gnu++98 gcov failed: spawn failed I believe that rather than "dg-compile", it should use "dg-do run { target native }" like almost all other gcov tests? For the other errors: FAIL: gcc.misc-tests/gcov-31.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.misc-tests/gcov-32.c (test for excess errors) the log actually says: /gcov-31.c:12:8: error: unknown type name 'sigjmp_buf'; did you mean 'jmp_buf'? /gcov-31.c: In function 'run_pending_traps': /gcov-31.c:22:5: error: implicit declaration of function '__sigsetjmp' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] /gcov-32.c:6:8: error: unknown type name 'sigjmp_buf'; did you mean 'jmp_buf'? /gcov-32.c:21:19: error: passing argument 1 of 'setjmp' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion] I haven't looked further, but does this indicate a dependency on glibc? (this target "arm-none-eabi" uses newlib) Thanks, Christophe > Used configuration : > *CI config* tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc arm-eabi -mthumb -march=armv8-m.base -mtune=cortex-m23 -mfloat-abi=soft -mfpu=auto > *configure and test flags:* --target arm-eabi --disable-multilib --with-mode=thumb --with-cpu=cortex-m23 --with-float=soft --target_board=-mthumb/-march=armv8-m.base/-mtune=cortex-m23/-mfloat-abi=soft/-mfpu=auto qemu_cpu=cortex-m33 > > We track this bug report under https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1551. 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_m23_soft_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-thumb_m23_soft_e… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > * https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m23_soft_e… > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m23_soft_e… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_embed_check_gcc--master-thumb_m23_soft_e… > > 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=8ed2d5d219e999aee42015a0d…

1 month, 2 weeks

2
2
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain