On 31/03/2025 11:08, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 11:56, Christophe Lyon > <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 at 22:07, <ci_not...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>> Dear contributor, >>> >>> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please >>> find some details below. >>> >>> In gcc_check master-arm, after: >>> | gcc patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/109240 >>> | Author: Richard Earnshaw <rearn...@arm.com> >>> | Date: Wed Mar 26 17:19:11 2025 +0000 >>> | >>> | [PATCH] arm: don't vectorize fmaxf() unless unsafe math opts are >>> enabled >>> | >>> | This test has presumably been failing since vectorization was >>> enabled >>> | at -O2. I suspect part of the reason this wasn't picked up sooner >>> is >>> | that the test is a hybrid execution/scan-assembler test and the >>> | ... 29 lines of the commit log omitted. >>> | ... applied on top of baseline commit: >>> | 876a521a198 OpenMP: Fix declaration in append-args-interop.c test case >>> >>> Produces 2 regressions 2 improvements: >>> | >>> | regressions.sum: >>> | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... >>> | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/vect-fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times >>> vmaxnm.f32\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 1 >>> | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/vect-fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times >>> vminnm.f32\tq[0-9]+, q[0-9]+, q[0-9]+ 1 >>> | >>> | improvements.sum: >>> | Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/arm.exp ... >>> | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times >>> vmaxnm.f32\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+ 1 >>> | FAIL: gcc.target/arm/fmaxmin.c scan-assembler-times >>> vminnm.f32\ts[0-9]+, s[0-9]+, s[0-9]+ 1 >>> >> >> Hi Richard, >> >> I suspect the scripts were confused because there were some bugs in >> dg-directives during a few days, leading to random Tcl errors.
No, it was just very slow sending this report out. Part of the reason this was missed in my initial testing was because the test was a hybrid test - scan assembler + executable requiring specific hardware. This means the scan assembler is only run on targets where we have that hardware available, making the test far less useful than it could be. >> >> You've committed your patch by now anyway, just mentioning in case you >> are confused. I've responded to the other report (on the committed version). Fixed with r15-9064-gf30e180194bfbc R. >> >> Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience, >> > > > Hmm actually I was confused :-) > > The postcommit CI shows the same thing: > gcc.target/arm/fmaxmin.c now PASSes > but gcc.target/arm/vect-fmaxmin.c now FAILs. Do we want to add > -funsafe-math-optimizations to it? > > >> Christophe >> >> >> >>> Used configuration : >>> *CI config* tcwg_gcc_check master-arm >>> *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on >>> armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf >>> >>> 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_check--master-arm-precommit/11651/artifact/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/00-sumfiles/ >>> The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and >>> make commands are in >>> * >>> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-precommit/11651/artifact/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/notify/ >>> The list of [ignored] baseline and flaky failures are in >>> * >>> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-precommit/11651/artifact/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/sumfiles/xfails.xfail >>> >>> Current build : >>> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-precommit/11651/artifact/artifacts >>> Reference build : >>> https://ci.linaro.org/job/tcwg_gcc_check--master-arm-build/3611/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. IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list -- linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-toolchain-le...@lists.linaro.org
