On 07/25/2016 10:28 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
But it's not expected that it is not deterministic, so that it changes
run to run. Do you see that? Or some other problem? Please describe
it exactly.
It definitely changes run to run for me.
And do you have autofdo installed? (create_gcov)
No.
jeff
On 07/26/2016 06:28 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> And do you have autofdo installed? (create_gcov)
>
> -Andi
Ah, sorry for the false alarm, create_gcov is really missing on my distribution.
Martin
> >But it's not expected that it is not deterministic, so that it changes
> >run to run. Do you see that? Or some other problem? Please describe
> >it exactly.
> It definitely changes run to run for me.
And do you have autofdo installed? (create_gcov)
-Andi
On 07/25/2016 10:21 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:08:43PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
On 07/15/2016 10:37 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way?
For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as y
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:08:43PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 07/15/2016 10:37 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way?
> For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as you said:
>
> PASS
On 07/15/2016 10:37 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way?
For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as you said:
PASS: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c compilation, -g
UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/
> >Not sure what the status for autofdo is in this case. "make check -k"
> >is stable for me, but "make check -k -j#" gives unstable result in
> >tree-prof.exp tests. Anything I did wrong?
> I'm seeing unstable results as well, but haven't dug into it at all.
> It's definitely autofdo testing tho
On 07/15/2016 02:37 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way?
For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as you said:
PASS: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c compilation, -g
UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> >> I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way?
>> > For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as you said:
>> >
>> > PASS: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c compilation, -g
>> > UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c: Cannot run create_g
> >> I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way?
> > For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as you said:
> >
> > PASS: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c compilation, -g
> > UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c: Cannot run create_gcov
> > --binary /data/work/trunk/build/gcc/testsuite/gcc/
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> After this patch, I got below test results with command line: make
>>> check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="tree-prof.exp" -k
>>
>> That is expected if you don't have autofdo. You would prefer to hide
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> After this patch, I got below test results with command line: make
>> check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="tree-prof.exp" -k
>
> That is expected if you don't have autofdo. You would prefer to hide it?
>
>> Also I got unstable test result in tree-prof.exp
> After this patch, I got below test results with command line: make
> check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="tree-prof.exp" -k
That is expected if you don't have autofdo. You would prefer to hide it?
> Also I got unstable test result in tree-prof.exp if I run
> aforementioned command line with -jnum (parallell
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: ak
>
> Extend the existing bprob and tree-prof tests to also run with autofdo.
> The test runtimes are really a bit too short for autofdo, but it's
> a reasonable sanity check.
>
> This only works natively for now.
>
> dejagnu doesn't see
On 06/22/2016 06:37 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
From: Andi Kleen
Extend the existing bprob and tree-prof tests to also run with autofdo.
The test runtimes are really a bit too short for autofdo, but it's
a reasonable sanity check.
This only works natively for now.
dejagnu doesn't seem to support a
15 matches
Mail list logo
