linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

5378 discussions

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

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

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

1 month, 2 weeks

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

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

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

1 month, 2 weeks

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

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

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

1 month, 3 weeks

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

by Maxim Kuvyrkov

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

1 month, 3 weeks

[ACTIVITY] report week ending 8 Mar

by Peter Maydell

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

1 month, 3 weeks

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 2 patches in binutils: FAIL: 694 regressions on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 21:24, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. 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. > > In binutils_check master-aarch64 after: > > | 2 patches in binutils > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/86798 > | 0fe0a00e217 aarch64: Add support for SVE ADDPT, SUBPT, MADPT, MLAPT instructions > | b9319f64d9a aarch64: Add support for (M)ADDPT and (M)SUBPT instructions > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | f08311ceb1b gdb/testsuite: fix duplicate test names in gdb.trace/circ.exp > > FAIL: 694 regressions > Hi Yury, Please consider this notification as a false alarm: our precommit CI does not regenerate files such as aarch64-*-2.c, as required by your patches, thus leading to the tests failures reported here. You may have seen the discussion I started a few days ago about --enable-maintainer-mode being broken. Thanks, Christophe > regressions.sum: > === binutils tests === > > Running binutils:binutils-all/aarch64/aarch64.exp ... > FAIL: Check if efi app format is recognized > FAIL: Disassembler detects unallocated instruction encodings. > === gas tests === > > Running gas:gas/aarch64/aarch64.exp ... > FAIL: AArch64 Bignums in Literal Pool (PR 16688) > FAIL: AArch64 Mapping Symbols > ... and 718 more entries > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/116… > The full lists of regressions and progressions as well as configure and make commands are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/116… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/116… > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_binutils_check master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/116… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-build/838/art… > > 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, 3 weeks

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-14-9268-g574fd1f17f1: FAIL: 15 regressions: 15 progressions on aarch64

by Christophe Lyon

Hi Patrick, This report can be considered as a false alarm: the errors were already present in the baseline, but the ICE line number changed since your patch modified the code in the file where the ICE occurs. That being said, I've noticed another report saying that your patch broke bootstrap on i686. Thanks, Christophe On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 at 20:38, <ci_notify(a)linaro.org> wrote: > > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. 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-1168 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In master-aarch64 after: > > | commit gcc-14-9268-g574fd1f17f1 > | Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka(a)redhat.com> > | Date: Fri Mar 1 17:24:15 2024 -0500 > | > | c++/modules: depending local enums [PR104919, PR106009] > | > | For local enums defined in a non-template function or a function template > | instantiation it seems we neglect to make the function depend on the enum > | definition (which modules considers logically separate), which ultimately > | causes the enum definition to not be properly streamed before uses > | within the function definition are streamed. > | ... 75 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:6113) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6113) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6113) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6113) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6113) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6113) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6113) > ... and 9 more entries > > progressions.sum: > === g++ tests === > > Running g++:g++.dg/modules/modules.exp ... > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6114) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6114) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6114) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6114) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6114) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-2_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6114) > FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6114) > ... and 9 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/9… > The full lists of regressions and progressions as well as configure and make commands are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/9… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/9… > > 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/9… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gnu_native_check_gcc--master-aarch64-build/9… > > 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/574fd1f17f100c7c355ad26bc525ab5a33… > > 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/9…

1 month, 4 weeks

[ACTIVITY] report week ending 1 Mar

by Peter Maydell

Progress: * UM-2 [QEMU upstream maintainership] - code review, notably another round of the raspberry pi 4b emulation series. Reviewed and took a subset of the patches, which is enough to get a working model without PCI or ethernet. We'll work on the landing other parts, but no need to block the initial model on them. * QEMU-530 [QEMU ARMv9.5 Baseline CPU for TCG] - Started implementation of FEAT_ECV (enhanced counter virtualization); I have a preliminary set of patches which I am currently testing and hope to be able to send out early next week -- PMM

2 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] llvmorg-19-init-3481-g8c2ae42b3e1c: Failure on aarch64

by Nathan Chancellor

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 02:47:11PM +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. 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/LLVM-1153 , please let us know if you are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. > > In CI config tcwg_kernel/llvm-master-aarch64-lts-allyesconfig after: > > | commit llvmorg-19-init-3481-g8c2ae42b3e1c > | Author: Kupa-Martin <84517188+Kupa-Martin(a)users.noreply.github.com> > | Date: Tue Feb 27 11:58:59 2024 -0300 > | > | [Clang][Sema] Fix missing warning when comparing mismatched enums in … (#81418) > | > | …C mode > | > | Factored logic from `CheckImplicitConversion` into new methods > | `Expr::getEnumConstantDecl` and `Expr::getEnumCoercedType` for use in > | `checkEnumArithmeticConversions`. > | ... 2 lines of the commit log omitted. > > Results changed to > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # build_abe binutils: > -9 > # build_kernel_llvm: > -5 > # build_abe qemu: > -2 > # linux_n_obj: > 37 > > From > # reset_artifacts: > -10 > # build_abe binutils: > -9 > # build_kernel_llvm: > -5 > # build_abe qemu: > -2 > # linux_n_obj: > 22291 > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_kernel/llvm-master-aarch64-lts-allyesconfig > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_kernel--llvm-master-aarch64-lts-allyesconfig… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_kernel--llvm-master-aarch64-lts-allyesconfig… > > Reproduce last good and first bad builds: https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… > > Full commit : https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8c2ae42b3e1c6aa7c18f873edcebff7… > > List of configurations that regressed due to this commit : > * tcwg_kernel > ** llvm-master-aarch64-lts-allyesconfig > *** Failure > *** https://git-us.linaro.org/toolchain/ci/interesting-commits.git/plain/llvm/s… > *** https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_kernel--llvm-master-aarch64-lts-allyesconfig… Thanks a lot for the report, this is expected with that change. How we want to handle this in the kernel is currently under discussion at https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/2002. Cheers, Nathan

2 months

Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 6 patches in binutils: FAIL: 1 regressions on aarch64

by Jan Beulich

On 23.02.2024 15:24, ci_notify(a)linaro.org wrote: > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below. 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. So: The specific failure observed makes me guess that in the course of building generated files (opcodes/aarch64-*-2.c) aren't re-generated. If this is indeed the case, sending out such unsolicited emails (I've had a 2nd one in the meantime, for whatever reason) is a waste of everybody's time, even more so when not clearly indicating that fact, such that - quoting above - it is possible "within minutes" to understand what's going on / wrong. IOW - unless clarified I'm going to assume that the report here is a false negative. Jan > In binutils_check master-aarch64 after: > > | 6 patches in binutils > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/86276 > | 2d039d3b147 gas/NEWS: drop mention of Arm64's SVE2.1 and SME2.1 > | 38eca7294bd Arm64: correct SVE2.1 ld2q (scalar plus scalar) > | cb804986590 Arm64: correct SVE2.1 ld{3,4}q / st{3,4}q (scalar plus immediate) > | edaf01ca3b4 Arm64: check tied operand specifier in aarch64-gen > | 006ce007bc8 Arm64: check matching operands for predicated B16B16 insns > | ... and 1 more patches in binutils > | ... applied on top of baseline commit: > | e346d50a891 x86: rename vec_encoding and vex_encoding_* > > FAIL: 1 regressions > > regressions.sum: > === gas tests === > > Running gas:gas/aarch64/aarch64.exp ... > FAIL: Test of SVE2.1 instructions > > > You can find the failure logs in *.log.1.xz files in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/109… > The full lists of regressions and progressions as well as configure and make commands are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/109… > The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in > - https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/109… > > The configuration of this build is: > CI config tcwg_binutils_check master-aarch64 > > -----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<-------------------------- > The information below can be used to reproduce a debug environment: > > Current build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-precommit/109… > Reference build : https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_binutils_check--master-aarch64-build/797/art…

2 months

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
538
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain