Re: [patch] gcc/testsuite: Scale down long-running tree-prof.exp tests on slow targets

2020-07-21 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 1:14 AM Sandra Loosemore wrote: > > On 7/20/20 2:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > I think at least parts of tree-prof.exp exercises sample-based profiling > > which might require more iterations. For example cold_partition_label.c > > was changed by > > > > commit f63ba7

Re: [patch] gcc/testsuite: Scale down long-running tree-prof.exp tests on slow targets

2020-07-20 Thread Sandra Loosemore
On 7/20/20 2:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote: I think at least parts of tree-prof.exp exercises sample-based profiling which might require more iterations. For example cold_partition_label.c was changed by commit f63ba78ce6d50bf627dd18018179eb03bf89716f Author: Andi Kleen Date: Thu Jul 14 02:14

Re: [patch] gcc/testsuite: Scale down long-running tree-prof.exp tests on slow targets

2020-07-20 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 6:48 AM Sandra Loosemore wrote: > > I was looking at some timeout failures in nios2-linux-gnu test results > and found several tree-prof.exp tests were doing what appears to be an > excessive number of iterations (350 million?). Even though this is > hardware and not a sim

[patch] gcc/testsuite: Scale down long-running tree-prof.exp tests on slow targets

2020-07-19 Thread Sandra Loosemore
I was looking at some timeout failures in nios2-linux-gnu test results and found several tree-prof.exp tests were doing what appears to be an excessive number of iterations (350 million?). Even though this is hardware and not a simulator, I thought it would be reasonable to tell the test harne