David,
Have you been able to reproduce the jit test failures below on
tor? Is there some information I can get you from my builds to
help you debug it?
Thanks
Martin
On 06/11/2018 01:20 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 06/11/2018 12:34 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Mon, 2018-06-11 at 12:19 -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
I've been noticing a number of failures in LTO (and some other)
tests in my x86_64-builds most of which don't appear in results
reported on gcc-testresults (all those on lines that start with
with the '!' below) and that I don't recall seeing before.
The LTO tests seem to fail with errors like the one below:
/usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccIaufZk.lto.o: plugin needed to handle lto object
FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr64043 cp_lto_pr64043_0.o-cp_lto_pr64043_0.o link,
-flto -std=c++11
Has something changed in how GCC should be configured or built
or what version of Binutils it needs for these tests to pass?
My builds run on Fedora 25 with Binutils 2.26.1-1.fc25.
Thanks
Martin
FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/pr55976-1.c (7: -14)
! FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/val-prof-1.c (1: +1)
FAIL: g++.dg/guality/pr55665.C (1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/20091002-1 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr64043 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr65193 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr65302 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr65316 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr65549 (2: +2)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr66180 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr66705 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr68057 (4: +4)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr69077 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr69133 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr69137 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr79000 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr81940 (1: +1)
! FAIL: g++.dg/lto/pr85176 (1: +1)
FAIL: g++.dg/pr80481.C (3: -6)
! FAIL: gfortran.dg/lto/pr79108 (1: +1)
! FAIL: ./index0-out.go (1: +1)
! FAIL: jit.dg/test-compile-to-assembler.c, (1: +1)
! FAIL: jit.dg/test-compile-to-object.c, (1: +1)
I don't know about the LTO issues, but what are the jit.dg failures
that you're seeing?
The jit failures look like they're all caused by errors like
the one below:
FAIL: test-compile-to-assembler.c.exe killed: 11694 exp5 0 0 CHILDKILLED
SIGSEGV {segmentation violation}
Besides those above, there are a large number of others. I didn't
know those we jit tests until I looked at the jit log. The full
list is below.
! FAIL: jit.dg/test-compile-to-assembler.c, (1: +1)
! FAIL: jit.dg/test-compile-to-object.c, (1: +1)
! FAIL: output-of-test-compile-to-assembler.c.s (1: +1)
! FAIL: output-of-test-compile-to-dynamic-library.c.so (1: +1)
! FAIL: output-of-test-compile-to-executable.c.exe (2: +2)
! FAIL: output-of-test-compile-to-object.c.o (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-accessing-struct.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-accessing-union.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-alignment.cc.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-alignment.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-arith-overflow.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-array-as-pointer.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-arrays.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-autovectorize.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-benchmark.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-calling-external-function.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-calling-function-ptr.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-combination.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-compile-to-assembler.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-compile-to-dynamic-library.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-compile-to-executable.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-compile-to-object.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-compound-assignment.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-constants.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-debug-strings.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-dot-product.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-empty.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-error-array-bounds.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-error-gcc_jit_timer_pop-mismatch.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-error-gcc_jit_timer_pop-too-many.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-error-impossible-must-tail-call.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-error-pr63969-missing-driver.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-expressions.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-extra-options.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-factorial.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-factorial-must-tail-call.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-fibonacci.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-functions.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-hello-world.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-linked-list.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-long-names.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-nested-contexts.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-nested-loops.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-operator-overloading.cc.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-pr66700-observing-write-through-ptr.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-pr66779.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-quadratic.cc.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-quadratic.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-reading-struct.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-returning-function-ptr.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-string-literal.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-sum-of-squares.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-switch.cc.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-switch.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-threads.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-types.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-using-global.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-validly-unreachable-block.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-vector-rvalues.cc.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-vector-types.cc.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: test-volatile.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: toyvm.cc.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: toyvm.c.exe (1: +1)
! FAIL: verify-dynamic-library.c.exe (1: +1)
Martin
PS I run the test suite on tor with -j96 in case that helps.
I've been using -j96 for at least a couple of GCC releases
with no issues. The only thing that might have changed is
that lately there is sometimes another parallel build running
on the machine quite often. It runs as root so I don't know
for sure who it belongs to. My guess is some automation.
