Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> writes: > On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 at 14:17, Sam James via Gcc-regression > <gcc-regress...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >> >> ci_not...@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@lists.linaro.org >> > mailing list, Libera's #linaro-tcwg channel, or ping your favourite >> > Linaro toolchain developer on the usual project channel. >> > >> > We understand 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-1388 , please let us know if you >> > are looking at the problem and/or when you have a fix. >> >> Should be fixed with r15-4692-g40fedaf35fa99a9728d5b84d47035f4c92e1ba90. >> > Thanks for the feedback. > So now it's an "assemble" only test, rather than a "(LTO) link" one? >
Yes. What I'm doing (and have been doing the last few months) is finding tests which were never being run and fixing them up. In this case, I found a bunch of tests in lto/ which were being ignored because their filename was wrong. I missed that the tbaa test was broken when comparing results at first after I'd renamed it and made some initial fixes. In the end, there were a few problems left: * when doing a "proper LTO" test, the needed dump isn't available (so moved to be an assemble + LTO test); * the scan fails when the dump needed is actually possible, so I XFAIL'd and filed a bug for Honza to look at (PR117299). thanks, sam _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list -- linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-toolchain-le...@lists.linaro.org
