linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

16 participants
5599 discussions

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gdb patch #84145: FAIL: 1 regressions: 1 progressions on arm

by Tom de Vries

On 1/16/24 07:42, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > FAIL: 1 regressions: 1 progressions > > regressions.sum: > === gdb tests === > > Running gdb:gdb.threads/staticthreads.exp ... > FAIL: gdb.threads/staticthreads.exp: up 10 FTR, filed as https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31254 . Thanks, - Tom

1 year, 5 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 5 patches in gdb: FAIL: 121 regressions: 1 progressions on arm

by Thiago Jung Bauermann

Hello, ci_notify(a)linaro.org writes: > In gdb_check master-arm after: > > | 5 patches in gdb > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/84201 > | 4a7c4c70418 Added docs > | e50ecf9d8ee Add breakpointLocations request > | 74f628035c8 Change gdb.LineTableEntry & Add gdb.lookup_linetable > | a7dd827cb3a Add column to maint info linetable output > | 013518443b6 Add column to linetable entry > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 87339680236 Automatic date update in version.in > > FAIL: 121 regressions: 1 progressions > > regressions.sum: > === gdb tests === > > Running gdb:gdb.base/async.exp ... > FAIL: gdb.base/async.exp: finish& > FAIL: gdb.base/async.exp: nexti& > > Running gdb:gdb.base/maint.exp ... > UNRESOLVED: gdb.base/maint.exp: help maint > UNRESOLVED: gdb.base/maint.exp: help maint info > UNRESOLVED: gdb.base/maint.exp: help maint print > ... and 172 more entries The Linaro CI is undergoing some instability. These failures aren't related to your patch. Sorry for the false alarm. -- Thiago

1 year, 5 months

some help with reproducing a ci fail

by Iain Sandoe

Hi So, I have a ci fail email, and it seems likely to be a valid complaint - but the reproduce instructions do not work on my platform (bash is not new enough) and also do not work on cfarm186 (../jenkins-scripts/jenkins-helpers.sh: line 1762: ts: command not found) For the record, the patch that is flagged as failing *was* tested on aarch64-linux-gnu (cfarm185) So, I am trying to figure out if the target is different, or some other configure argument. .. but I cannot work out the failing configure line at present - nor can I see a place to download the console log from the actual failing GCC build (which would presumably have that configure line). any help much appreciated. Iain

1 year, 5 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 7 patches in gcc: Failure on arm

by Lehua Ding

Hi, I received an error reported by CI for my patchs, I would like to ask how I have to reproduce it locally? I looked at the logs and didn't find the way how it compiles. Thanks in advance. On 2023/11/8 16:59, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > In gcc_build master-arm after: > > | 7 patches in gcc > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/79366 > | ef64c12c9f0 lra: Support subreg live range track and conflict detect > | a871f544e2b lra: Apply live_subreg df_problem to lra pass > | 6437747d6f3 ira: Add all nregs >= 2 pseudos to tracke subreg list > | 1a2da1ad5f0 ira: Support subreg copy > | 4f8d8e764e0 ira: Support subreg live range track > | ... and 2 more patches in gcc > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | ca281a7b971 [i386] APX: Fix ICE due to movti postreload splitter [PR112394] > > Results changed to > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > # FAILED > # First few build errors in logs: > # 00:03:49 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/libgcc2.c:2700:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:49 make[2]: *** [Makefile:505: _muldc3.o] Error 1 > # 00:03:49 make[1]: *** [Makefile:14486: all-target-libgcc] Error 2 > # 00:03:49 make: *** [Makefile:1056: all] Error 2 > # 00:03:41 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:72:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:41 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/libgcc2.c:2700:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:41 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:72:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:41 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:72:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:41 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:72:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:42 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/libgcc2.c:2865:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:42 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:143:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:42 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:143:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:42 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:143:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > # 00:03:42 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/libgcc/fixed-bit.c:143:1: internal compiler error: Aborted > > From > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > 1 > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_build/master-arm > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm-precommit/4076/artifac… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm-build/1364/artifact/ar… -- Best, Lehua (RiVAI) lehua.ding(a)rivai.ai

1 year, 5 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #80969: Failure on arm

by Rainer Orth

ci_notify(a)linaro.org writes: > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your > patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, > please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, > Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain > developer on the usual project channel. > > In gcc_build master-arm after: > > | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/80969 > | Author: Rainer Orth <ro(a)CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> > | Date: Wed Nov 29 15:10:00 2023 +0100 > | > | libiberty: Disable hwcaps for sha1.o > | > | This patch > | > | commit bf4f40cc3195eb7b900bf5535cdba1ee51fdbb8e > | Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Tue Nov 28 13:14:05 2023 +0100 > | ... 26 lines of the commit log omitted. > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | 4c909c6ee38 In 'libgomp.c/target-simd-clone-{1,2,3}.c', restrict > | 'scan-offload-ipa-dump's to 'only_for_offload_target amdgcn-amdhsa' > > Results changed to > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > # FAILED > # First few build errors in logs: > # 00:02:15 gccgo: fatal error: Killed signal terminated program go1 > # 00:02:23 gcc: error: @HWCAP_CFLAGS@: linker input file not found: No such > file or directory > # 00:02:23 make[2]: *** [Makefile:1219: regex.o] Error 1 > # 00:02:23 make[1]: *** [Makefile:8370: all-libiberty] Error 2 > # 00:02:23 make: *** [Makefile:1057: all] Error 2 > # 00:01:06 gccgo: fatal error: Killed signal terminated program go1 > # 00:02:10 gcc: error: @HWCAP_CFLAGS@: linker input file not found: No such > file or directory > # 00:02:10 make[2]: *** [Makefile:776: fdmatch.o] Error 1 > # 00:02:10 gcc: error: @HWCAP_CFLAGS@: linker input file not found: No such > file or directory > # 00:02:10 make[2]: *** [Makefile:805: filedescriptor.o] Error 1 > # 00:02:10 gcc: error: @HWCAP_CFLAGS@: linker input file not found: No such > file or directory > # 00:02:10 make[2]: *** [Makefile:837: fnmatch.o] Error 1 > # 00:02:10 gcc: error: @HWCAP_CFLAGS@: linker input file not found: No such > file or directory > # 00:02:10 make[2]: *** [Makefile:817: filename_cmp.o] Error 1 > # 00:02:10 gcc: error: @HWCAP_CFLAGS@: linker input file not found: No such > file or directory > > From > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # true: > 0 > # build_abe gcc: > 1 > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gcc_build master-arm > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm-precommit/4887/artifac… > Reference build : > https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-arm-build/1444/artifact/ar… > As is customary for gcc patches, this patch didn't include the generated files to simplify review. Thus, to test it in any meaningful way, one needs to run aclocal and autoconf before configuring/building. Not doing so just produces meaningless mails from the CI. Rainer

1 year, 5 months

[ACTIVITY] report week ending 12 Jan

by Peter Maydell

Progress: * UM-2 [QEMU upstream maintainership] - further diagnosed the cause of the reported regression in virtio-pci running Linux on 32-bit arm emulation: the kernel the user was using was a non-LPAE one. So the fix is "use an LPAE kernel, or else manually set highmem=off". It would be nice if the kernel produced a more helpful error message for the case where it was built without CONFIG_LPAE and the PCI controller ECAM window is above the 4GB mark... - lots of code review this week, including: + a patch trying to add support to the memory system core for unaligned accesses to a device whose implementation doesn't directly handle them itself + another round of the Nuvoton GMAC and Mailbox device patchset + various parts of the new STM32L4x5 emulation + other smaller patches - patch: remove some now-unneeded code from arm_pamax() - patch: improve docs for the virt board 'highmem' option - patch: work around a bug in 'htags' that was causing intermittent failures of one of our CI jobs - patch: fix 'raven' PCI controller handling of unaligned accesses - handling merging of pull requests; spent some time making sure we have reported issues in our bug tracker (new tag "flaky-ci") for any intermittent CI failures, and asking people to investigate some of them -- PMM

1 year, 5 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-14-7074-gf9fbf93dc82: FAIL: 15 regressions: 15 progressions on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Hi, I guess this is a false alarm since the error message was FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) and is now: FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) (that is, only the line number changes) Thanks, Christophe On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 08:32, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. > > We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1101 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In master-aarch64 after: > > | commit gcc-14-7074-gf9fbf93dc82 > | Author: waffl3x <waffl3x(a)protonmail.com> > | Date: Sun Jan 7 00:00:10 2024 +0000 > | > | c++: P0847R7 (deducing this) - prerequisite changes. [PR102609] > | > | Adds the xobj_flag member to lang_decl_fn and a corresponding member access > | macro and predicate to support the addition of explicit object member > | functions. Additionally, since explicit object member functions are also > | non-static member functions, we need to change uses of > | DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P to clarify whether they intend to include > | ... 76 lines of the commit log omitted. > > FAIL: 15 regressions: 15 progressions > > regressions.sum: > === g++ tests === > > Running g++:g++.dg/modules/modules.exp ... > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6112) > ... and 10 more entries > > progressions.sum: > === g++ tests === > > Running g++:g++.dg/modules/modules.exp ... > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110) > ... and 10 more entries > > 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/8… . > The full lists of regressions and progressions are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/8… . > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/8… . > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/8… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/8… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > > Full commit : https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/f9fbf93dc82525a0f54a2293b7ec92d657… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc > ** master-aarch64 > *** FAIL: 15 regressions: 15 progressions > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/8…

1 year, 5 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #83947: FAIL: 2 regressions on arm

by chenxiaolong

At 08:36 +0000 on Friday, 2024-01-12, wrote ci_notify(a)linaro.org: > Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please > follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's > #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain > developer on the usual project channel. Ok, I will fix this error as soon as possible!

1 year, 5 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-14-6840-g86f535cb466: FAIL: 2 regressions: 2 progressions on arm

by Christophe Lyon

Hi David, As you have probably guessed, this is a false alarm: the testcases you updated were already failing before your patch, but it changed the line numbers, thus making the scripts think a failure disappeared and a new one appeared. Thanks, Christophe On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 at 01:15, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. > > We appreciate that it might be difficult to find the necessary logs or reproduce the issue locally. If you can't get what you need from our CI within minutes, let us know and we will be happy to help. > > We track this report status in https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1094 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In bootstrap_check master-arm-check_bootstrap_lto after: > > | commit gcc-14-6840-g86f535cb466 > | Author: David Edelsohn <dje.gcc(a)gmail.com> > | Date: Tue Dec 26 16:44:09 2023 +0000 > | > | testsuite: Skip analyzer out-of-bounds-diagram on AIX. > | > | The out-of-bounds diagram tests fail on AIX. > | > | gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > | * gcc.dg/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-17.c: Skip on AIX. > | * gcc.dg/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-18.c: Same. > | ... 2 lines of the commit log omitted. > > FAIL: 2 regressions: 2 progressions > > regressions.sum: > === gcc tests === > > Running gcc:gcc.dg/analyzer/analyzer.exp ... > FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-17.c expected multiline pattern lines 15-36 > FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-18.c expected multiline pattern lines 15-44 > > === Results Summary === > > progressions.sum: > === gcc tests === > > Running gcc:gcc.dg/analyzer/analyzer.exp ... > FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-17.c expected multiline pattern lines 14-35 > FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-18.c expected multiline pattern lines 14-43 > > === Results Summary === > > 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 progressions 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_… . > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_bootstrap_check master-arm-check_bootstrap_lto > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > 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_… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > > Full commit : https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/86f535cb4664fcaf96ff12942887db949b… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_bootstrap_check > ** master-arm-check_bootstrap_lto > *** FAIL: 2 regressions: 2 progressions > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/gcc/sh… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_bootstrap_check--master-arm-check_bootstrap_…

1 year, 5 months

[ACTIVITY] report week ending 5 Jan

by Peter Maydell

Progress (short week, 2 days): * UM-2 [QEMU upstream maintainership] - post holiday email/slack/etc catchup - started merging pullrequests (I'm doing release management for the 9.0 cycle) - investigated a reported regression in virtio-pci running Linux on 32-bit arm emulation. This turns out to be that we made a change that *fixed* a bug in QEMU (we were incorrectly laying out the 'virt' board assuming a 32-bit v8 CPU couldn't use LPAE), which reveals a bug in Linux (it mishandles the PCI controller DTB entry saying the ECAM region is above the 4GB boundary)... * QEMU-623 [Nested Virtualization Emulation] - dealt with the minor review followups on this patchset; just waiting for one last reviewed-by tag before we can upstream it -- PMM

1 year, 5 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain