> -Original Message-
> From: ci_not...@linaro.org
> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2024 10:30 AM
> To: rgue...@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: gcc-regress...@gcc.gnu.org; Andrew Pinski (QUIC)
>
> Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-15-3087-gb07f8a30115: FAIL: 2
> regressions on aarch
This is already recorded as https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116409
. I am about to submit a v2 of the patch to fix this too.
> -Original Message-
> From: ci_not...@linaro.org
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2024 8:34 AM
> To: Andrew Pinski (QUIC)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Thiago Jung Bauermann
> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 3:40 PM
> To: Andrew Pinski (QUIC)
> Cc: linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc patch #89057: FAIL: 28 regressions on arm
>
> WARNING: This email or
These are all expected "failures" for arm (aarch32) really; the new testcases
were known to fail for that target; it is recorded as PR 224847. I was not sure
how to record this besides in the commit message.
Should I xfail them for the targets that are known to fail?
Thanks,
And
This does not make sense at all. The patch only touches aarch64 code and does
NOT even touch arm code so there can't be any regressions with arm.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
> -Original Message-
> From: ci_not...@linaro.org
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 9:34 PM
> To: An
> -Original Message-
> From: ci_not...@linaro.org
> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2023 7:40 AM
> To: Andrew Pinski (QUIC)
> Cc: gcc-regress...@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [Linaro-TCWG-CI] gcc-14-6861-g200531d5b9f: FAIL: 1 regressions
> on arm
>
> Dear contributor, ou
On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 12:26 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> I could not reproduce the bootstrap failure at -O3 on x86_64.
> I used --with-build-config=bootstrap-O3 .
> Maybe this is an arm (32?) only issue.
It looks like it is only reproducible with ILP32.
And reported as https:/
I could not reproduce the bootstrap failure at -O3 on x86_64.
I used --with-build-config=bootstrap-O3 .
Maybe this is an arm (32?) only issue.
Thanks,
Andrew
From: ci_not...@linaro.org
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2023 5:33 AM
To: Andrew Pinski
Cc: gcc
sue ...
From: ci_not...@linaro.org
Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 3:07 PM
To: Andrew Pinski
Subject: [EXT] [Linaro-TCWG-CI] 2 patches in gcc: FAIL: 1 regressions
External Email
--
Dear contributor, our automatic CI
> - Investigated why cross-build gdbserver needs GMP and MPFR (and is thus
failing to build) in tcwg-gnu-build jobs. Submitted Gerrit review
request to fix it.
This seems to be related to my change to the toplevel makefiles. Are you just
building gdbserver only or gdb too? What are the config
Oh this is the kernel GCC plugin. Figures since GCC has always declared the
plugin API is not stable. The kernel needs fixing then.
Thanks,
Andrew
From: ci_not...@linaro.org
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2022 11:10 AM
To: Richard Biener
Cc: linaro-toolchain@list
I think this is the same as https://gcc.gnu.org/PR103288 and I am testing a fix
for this.
Thanks,
Andrew
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
ci_not...@linaro.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 8:19 PM
To: Richard Biener
Cc: linaro-toolchain@lists.lin
did not show up in
GCC bootstrap until my patches.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Andrew Pinski
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2021 2:36 PM
To: Maxim Kuvyrkov
Cc: linaro-toolchain
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [TCWG CI] Regression
uired for GCC 10+ LTO
usage.
Thanks,
Andrew
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Andrew Pinski
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2021 12:17 PM
To: Maxim Kuvyrkov
Cc: linaro-toolchain
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [TCWG CI] Regression caused by
I filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102389 for the problem.
I will look into fixing it either later today or tomorrow. It might just need
to export nm and such.
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Andrew Pinski
Sent: Friday, September
__
From: Maxim Kuvyrkov
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2021 2:30 AM
To: Andrew Pinski
Cc: linaro-toolchain
Subject: [EXT] Re: [TCWG CI] Regression caused by
gcc:9e58de3ce00fc2385c9efb7faf321e0c601f0b0c
External Email
---
Oh it is only on the trunk of GCC so to some extend it caught a regression in
GCC :).
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Andrew Pinski
Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 2:36 PM
To: Maxim Kuvyrkov; Linus Torvalds; Alex Deucher
Cc: linaro-toolchain
Filed as https://gcc.gnu.org/PR102245 .
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Andrew Pinski
Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 2:31 PM
To: Maxim Kuvyrkov; Linus Torvalds; Alex Deucher
Cc: linaro-toolchain
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [CI-NOTIFY]: TCWG Bisect
MAPPED_ACCESS1,
enable);
return tmp;
}
This is definitely a false warning. I will be filing a bug upstream in a few
minutes.
Thanks,
Andrew
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Andrew Pinski
Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 1:2
turn tmp;
}
But I could not get GCC to warn. I think a toolchain person should look at the
preprocessed source to see what is happening.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Maxim Kuvyrkov
Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 2:30 A
Hi all,
Since freenode has gone down hill, are there any plans for moving the IRC
channels to another server, like OFTC?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
From: linaro-toolchain-boun...@lists.linaro.org
on behalf of Matthew Gretton-Dann
Sent: Tuesday, March 12
Yes it is exactly that one because of Bar::Bar takes a std::pair
type and that bug is about std::pair causing an ABI mismatch for -std=c++17 and
-std=c++14 on aarch64.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
From: Andrew Pinski
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 9:39 AM
To
I am thinking this is the same issue as referecned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94383 .
Thanks,
Andrew
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Jussi Lind
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2020 5:47 AM
To: Maxim Kuvyrkov
Cc: linaro-toolchain@lists.
y the RTL loop invariant code motion pass did
NOTHING here.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Andrew Pinski
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 6:44 AM
To: Adhemerval Zanella; Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Linaro Toolchain Mailman List
Subjec
oking for.
From: Adhemerval Zanella
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 6:41 AM
To: Andrew Pinski; Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Linaro Toolchain Mailman List
Subject: Re: [EXT] High stack usage due ftree-ch
On 22/11/2019 11:38, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> It is enabled in all optimization lev
>It is enabled in all optimization levels besides -Os (since besides possible
> increasing the stack usage it also might increase code side).
It is disabled at -Os because it is duplicating the loop header; which in turn
is considered increasing code size (though sometimes that can have a side
ef
n. It has some heurstics but those are not always good.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
From: linaro-toolchain on behalf of
Adhemerval Zanella
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 5:40 AM
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Linaro Toolchain Mailman List
Subject: [EXT] High stack usage
Looks like there is a bug.
Smull with the scalar operand as the last operand only supports the first SIMD
16 registers (0-15).
Without a testcase it is hard to say if it is a bug in the opencv or that
compiler.
NOTE GCC 4.8.5 is not really supported upstream either. I know RedHat supports
this
28 matches
Mail list logo
