Hi James,

Thanks for reaching out!

[CC: Christophe], would you please look at replacing [broken] links to 
testsuite results with links to build logs?  See below.

See comments inline.

> On Feb 20, 2025, at 13:42, James K. Lowden <jklow...@schemamania.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello, 
> 
> I seem to have begun receiving CI/CD patch notifications from 
> ci_not...@linaro.org.  I don't understand them, and they might be premature.  
> I don't want to ignore them, though, if they do matter.  
> 
> I am supplying a 100,000 line patch, roughly, to add a COBOL front-end to 
> gcc.  As of now, there is no libgcobol or gcc/cobol directory in the master 
> branch.  The supplied patch came most recently in 14 "easy pieces".  To be 
> applied successfully, the patches to the Python scripts that create those 
> directories must be applied first.  
> 
> The URLs at the end of the mail come up 404.  I suppose they are ephemeral.  
> I haven't been able to look at a complete log to understand the basis of the 
> report.  
> 
> The mail says to ask here, so here I be. Please advise.  I'm not subscribed 
> to this list.  
> 
> Thanks, 
> 
> --jkl
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 15:10:38 +0000 (UTC)
> From: ci_not...@linaro.org
> To: jklow...@schemamania.org
> Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #106762: Failure on aarch64
> 
> 
> Dear contributor,
> 
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es).
> Please find some details below.
> 
> In gcc_build master-aarch64, after:
>  | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/106762

Looking at the above patchwork entry, I see that your patch "COBOL v3: 3/14 80K 
bld: config and build machinery" was not detected as part of the series [1], 
which means it was applied without the prerequisite 1/14 and 2/14 patches.  
That's the reason for the failure.

[1] https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/list/?series=44237

Looking at your whole submission [2], I see that patchwork sees each patch as 
its own series, so our CI will test them individually.  I'm, actually, 
surprised that only patch 3/14 fails to build -- the rest pass the CI.  I would 
have expected all but 1/14 to fail.

[2] https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/list/?submitter=37098 

>  | Author: James K. Lowden <jklow...@schemamania.org>
>  | Date:   Tue Feb 18 18:37:13 2025 -0500
>  | 
>  |     [PATCH] COBOL v3:  3/14  80K bld: config and build machinery
>  |     
>  |     From f89a50238de62b73d9fc44ee7226461650ab119d Tue 18 Feb 2025
> 04:19:10 PM EST |     From: "James K. Lowden" <jklow...@symas.com>
>  |     Date: Tue 18 Feb 2025 04:19:10 PM EST
>  | ... 27 lines of the commit log omitted.
>  | ... applied on top of baseline commit:
>  | 427386042f0 LoongArch: Use normal RTL pattern instead of UNSPEC for
> {x,}vsr{a,l}ri instructions
> 
> Produces Failure:
>  | Results changed to
>  | # reset_artifacts:
>  | -10
>  | # true:
>  | 0
>  | # build_abe gcc:
>  | # FAILED
>  | # First few build errors in logs:
>  | # 00:03:17 make[1]: *** [Makefile:4720: all-gcc] Error 2
>  | # 00:03:17 make: *** [Makefile:1063: all] Error 2

The build log is at [3].

[3] 
https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/16368/artifact/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/04-build_abe-gcc/

Looking at make-gcc-stage2.log.xz I see
===
make[2]: *** No rule to make target 
'/home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_4/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/gcc/cobol/cobol1.cc',
 needed by 's-gtype'.  Stop.
===




>  | 
>  | From
>  | # reset_artifacts:
>  | -10
>  | # true:
>  | 0
>  | # build_abe gcc:
>  | 1
> 
> Used configuration :
> *CI config* tcwg_gcc_build master-aarch64
> *configure and test flags:* 
> 
> If you have any questions regarding this report, please ask on
> linaro-toolchain@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_build--master-aarch64-precommit/16368/artifact/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/00-sumfiles/

This is a build failure, but we [mistakenly] include a link to the testsuite 
results -- we will fix this.

> The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and
> make commands are in
> *
> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/16368/artifact/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/notify/

This one works.

> The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in
> *
> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/16368/artifact/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/sumfiles/xfails.xfail

Similar to the first, this is where testsuite xfails would have been; need to 
remove this link.

> 
> Current build   :
> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-precommit/16368/artifact/artifacts
> Reference build :
> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_build--master-aarch64-build/3164/artifact/artifacts
> 
> Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update
> generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the
> master files.
> _______________________________________________
> linaro-toolchain mailing list -- linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-toolchain-le...@lists.linaro.org


--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org



_______________________________________________
linaro-toolchain mailing list -- linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-toolchain-le...@lists.linaro.org

Reply via email to