Hi!
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 at 13:55, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On 2025-04-17T18:15:50+, ci_notify--- via Gcc-regression
> wrote:
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In bootstrap_check master-arm-check_boots
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 11:56, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 at 22:07, wrote:
> >
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In gcc_
abihf.
> Je vous en remercie d'avance.
You're welcome!
Thanks,
Christophe
> Paul
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 at 10:12, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 19:22, Paul Richard Thomas
>> wrote:
>&
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 at 07:22, Martin Simmons wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 23:58:18 + (UTC), ci notify said:
> > ...
> > In gdb_check master-aarch64, after:
> > | gdb patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/109371
> > ...
> > Used configuration :
> > *CI config* tcwg_gdb_check ma
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 at 14:50, Jens Remus wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> On 03.04.2025 14:32, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
>
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
>
> Could you please help me understand what the detected problem(s) are?
> Th
Hi!
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 19:22, Paul Richard Thomas
wrote:
>
> Hi Andre,
>
> Thanks for the review - I'll act on the points that you raised.
>
> The Linaro people reported a failure in reduce_1.f90 execution, which I
> believe is due to incorrect casting of 'dim' and a wrong specification of i
On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 at 17:49, Sam James via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> ci_not...@linaro.org writes:
>
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In arm-eabi cortex-m33 hard, after:
> > | commit gcc-
On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 at 22:07, 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
>
On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 at 12:59, Sam James via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> ci_not...@linaro.org writes:
>
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In gcc_check master-aarch64, after:
> > | commit gcc-1
On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 15:15, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote:
>
> On 3/28/25 14:44, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 14:24, wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear contributor,
> >>
> >> Our automatic CI has detected problems rel
Hi,
On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 14:24, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some details below.
>
> In arm-eabi cortex-m23 soft, after:
> | commit gcc-15-8947-g8ed2d5d219e
> | Author: Jørgen Kvalsvik
> | Date: Tue J
Hi,
We had a "disk full" issue on that machine, sorry for the false alarm.
We can manually retrigger the build if you wish?
Thanks,
Christophe
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 12:24, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some de
Hi,
We had a "disk full" issue on that machine, sorry for the false alarm.
We can manually retrigger the build if you wish?
Thanks,
Christophe
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 12:22, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some de
Hi,
We had a "disk full" issue on that machine, sorry for the false alarm.
We can manually retrigger the build if you wish?
Thanks,
Christophe
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 12:22, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some de
Hi,
We had a "disk full" issue on that machine, sorry for the false alarm.
We can manually retrigger the build if you wish?
Thanks,
Christophe
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 at 12:10, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some de
On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 12:31, Richard Earnshaw (lists) via
Gcc-regression wrote:
>
> On 21/03/2025 20:36, 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
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 22:02, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 14:54, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 09:53, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Monday, 17 March 2025, Christophe Ly
On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 at 21:54, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 at 13:16, wrote:
> >
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In arm-eabi cortex-m23 soft, after:
> > | commit gcc-15
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 23:32, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 at 09:27, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 at 09:10, Christophe Lyon
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Jonathan,
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2 Mar 20
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 23:55, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> On 06/03/2025 20:29, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
>
> This has been fixed on trunk by r15
Hi Jonathan,
On Sun, 2 Mar 2025 at 23:28, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2 Mar 2025 at 02:42, wrote:
> >
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In arm-eabi cortex-m7 hard
Hello,
On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 at 04:33, Jan Dubiec wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I have recived the email quoted below. I wonder how my patch could have
> caused an issue when the only file it touches is related to H8/300
> target, not ARM. As far as I can see in the logs you are not building an
> H8/300
Hi Jakub,
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 at 16:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 03:13:10PM +, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In gcc_build master-arm, after:
> > | gcc pa
Hi,
Sorry for this spurious notification, it seems we had a "disk full"
issue on the build machine.
You can ignore this error message.
Christophe
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 at 03:06, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some
On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 at 23:29, Iain Buclaw via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> Excerpts from ci_not...@linaro.org's message of Februar 27, 2025 7:38 pm:
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please
> > find some details below.
> >
> > In master-
Hi,
Sorry for this spurious notification, it seems we had a "disk full"
issue on the build machine.
You can ignore this error message.
Christophe
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 at 03:12, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some
Hi,
On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 at 03:06, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
> 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.
Thanks for the heads-up, this should now be fixed.
Christophe
Thanks for your message, indeed the CI status is back to its previous value.
Cheers,
Christophe
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 21:15, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 02, 2025 at 10:30:18AM +, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Dear contributor,
> >
> > Our automatic CI has detected problems re
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 at 12:58, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor,
>
> Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find
> some details below.
>
> In gcc_build master-aarch64, after:
> | 4 patches in gcc
> | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/103420
>
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 at 13:59, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> gfortran.dg/pr112877-1.f90 is
> ---
> ! { dg-do compile }
> ! { dg-options "-Os" }
>
> program test
> use iso_c_binding, only: c_short
> interface
> subroutine foo(a) bind(c)
> import c_short
> integer(kind=c_sho
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 23:54, Sam James wrote:
>
> This is https://sourceware.org/PR32366.
Thanks for the pointer!
Christophe
> ___
> linaro-toolchain mailing list -- linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to linaro-toolchain
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 at 15:31, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 06:57:21AM +, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> > patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> > please follow up o
Hi Peter,
You can ignore this notification: we had a temporary hack in our scripts to
apply that patch before it was merged, hence the conflict after your merge.
We have reverted our hack, so builds should be ok again.
Thanks,
Christophe
Le ven. 1 nov. 2024, 07:47, a écrit :
> Dear contribut
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 at 19:25, Sam James wrote:
>
> Christophe Lyon writes:
>
> > On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 at 14:17, Sam James via Gcc-regression
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> ci_not...@linaro.org writes:
> >>
> >> > Dear contributor, our automa
On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 at 14:17, Sam James via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> ci_not...@linaro.org writes:
>
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to
> > your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any
> > questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lis
Hi!
On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 at 08:56, Li, Pan2 via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> I have a try with below command but get error like "cc1: error:
> '-mfloat-abi=hard': selected architecture lacks an FPU".
> Linux ubuntu-arm 4.15.0-20-generic #21-Ubuntu SMP Tue Apr 24 06:16:20 UTC
> 2018 aarch64 aarch64
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 at 06:28, Sam James via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> This is https://gcc.gnu.org/PR117177 which has a patch posted by Jakub
> already at
> https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/ZxArjATvc%2FnI6YiO@tucnak/.
Indeed, thanks for the pointer!
Christophe
___
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 at 12:15, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 at 06:33, wrote:
> >
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> > patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> > please follow up on l
On Mon, 30 Sept 2024 at 10:49, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 30 Sept 2024 at 07:22, wrote:
> >
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> > patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> > please follow up on
Hi,
Sorry for the delay
On Tue, 24 Sept 2024 at 15:17, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On 9/23/24 2:08 AM, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> > patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> > please fo
On Fri, 27 Sept 2024 at 11:42, Sam James via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> ci_not...@linaro.org writes:
>
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to
> > your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any
> > questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain@li
On Tue, 24 Sept 2024 at 13:56, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 19:54, David Malcolm wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2024-09-23 at 15:18 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > On Sun, 22 Sept 2024 at 00:39, David Malcolm
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 19:54, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-09-23 at 15:18 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > On Sun, 22 Sept 2024 at 00:39, David Malcolm
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 2024-09-21 at 04:30 +, ci_not...
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 15:44, Guinevere Larsen wrote:
>
> On 9/23/24 10:33 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > Hi Guinevere,
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 14:05, Guinevere Larsen
> > wrote:
> >> I think some issue has happened in the CI. Both this and 2 pat
Hi Guinevere,
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 14:05, Guinevere Larsen wrote:
>
> I think some issue has happened in the CI. Both this and 2 patches I've
> sent to the mailing list (one that changes no code, only the
> SECURITY.txt file) say that I've introduced regressions, yet the
> relevant test only h
Hi David,
On Sun, 22 Sept 2024 at 00:39, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2024-09-21 at 04:30 +, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to
> > your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any
> > questions, please foll
On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 15:55, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On 9/12/24 9:13 PM, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> > patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> > please follow up on linaro-toolchai
On Wed, 18 Sept 2024 at 02:05, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> On Sep 17, 2024, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
>
> > regressions.sum:
> > FAIL: c-c++-common/analyzer/out-of-bounds-diagram-8.c -std=c++
> > expected multiline pattern lines 20-35
>
> > improvements.sum:
> > FAIL: c-c++-c
Hi,
On Fri, 20 Sept 2024 at 15:24, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's
> #linaro-tcwg channel
On Fri, 20 Sept 2024 at 15:34, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> Hi Christophe,
>
> On Fri, 2024-09-20 at 15:30 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > Looks like our build queue is full (well more than full ~60 builds of
> > this type pending), bisecting regressions introduced before I
On Fri, 20 Sept 2024 at 14:47, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I thought this was resolved, but...
>
me too :-)
> On Thu, 2024-09-12 at 21:47 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 09:25:08AM +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > > Right, sorry fo
Hi Jason,
On Thu, 12 Sept 2024 at 00:15, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's
> #linaro-tcwg c
Right, sorry for the breakage.
This should now be fixed by
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2024-September/136743.html
Christophe
On Thu, 12 Sept 2024 at 08:33, Laurent Alfonsi
wrote:
>
> Yes, I reported to Christophe yesterday, he confirmed this comes from his
> linker commit and he's
Hi Jakub,
On Tue, 10 Sept 2024 at 05:17, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's
> #linaro-tcwg
On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 at 00:25, Sam James via Gcc-regression
wrote:
>
> ci_not...@linaro.org writes:
>
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to
> > your patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any
> > questions, please follow up on linaro-toolchain@list
Hi Harald,
On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 21:02, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's
> #linaro-tcwg c
Hi Tom.
As you may have noticed, your patch below caused regressions in the
libstdc++ testsuite on aarch64:
FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/debug.cc print redirected
FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/simple.cc print redirected
FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/simple11.cc print redirected
For instance,
Hi Pedro,
As you may have noticed, this patch caused new failures on arm.
Are you working on a fix?
Thanks,
Christophe
On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 at 16:59, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have a
Hi!
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 at 15:39, Metzger, Markus T
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> > | 4 patches in gdb
> > | Patchwork URL: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/88278
> > | 343a2568d2c gdb, infrun: fix multi-threaded reverse stepping
> > | a4cfc3d32a8 gdb, infrun, record: move no-history notificati
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 at 12:15, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's
> #linaro-tcwg channel, or p
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 at 21:24, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's
> #linaro-tcwg channel, or pi
Hi Patrick,
This report can be considered as a false alarm: the errors were
already present in the baseline, but the ICE line number changed since
your patch modified the code in the file where the ICE occurs.
That being said, I've noticed another report saying that your patch
broke bootstrap on
On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 at 10:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 26.02.2024 10:08, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 at 09:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 23.02.2024 15:24, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> >>> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected prob
Hi Jan,
On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 at 09:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 23.02.2024 15:24, ci_not...@linaro.org wrote:
> > Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> > patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> > please follow up on linaro-t
Hi Stephan,
Sorry this clearly looks like a false alarm.
We have enabled maintainer mode at configure time and it seems to have
unexpected consequences.
We've disabled it again, and will investigate what happened.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Thanks,
Christophe
On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 at 14:31, w
Hi,
I guess this is a false alarm since the error message was
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler
error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:6110)
and is now:
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-1_a.H -std=c++2b (internal compiler
error: in core_vals, at cp/module.cc:61
Hi David,
As you have probably guessed, this is a false alarm: the testcases you
updated were already failing before your patch, but it changed the
line numbers, thus making the scripts think a failure disappeared and
a new one appeared.
Thanks,
Christophe
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 at 01:15, wrote:
>
Hi Jakub,
Of course the CI is confused and reports regressions because after
your patch there are new "FAIL" enabled since you fixed the "ERROR"
cases.
It sees new "FAIL" and interprets that as a regression.
Thanks,
Christophe
On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 17:17, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our au
Hi!
On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 at 11:41, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow up on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list, Libera's
> #linaro-tcwg channel,
Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can
ignore this bogus report.
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:41, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow
Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can
ignore this bogus report.
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:40, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow
Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can
ignore this bogus report.
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:38, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow
Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can
ignore this bogus report.
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:35, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow
Sorry, there was a temporary breakage in our CI scripts, you can
ignore this bogus report.
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 18:25, wrote:
>
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below. If you have any questions,
> please follow
Hi,
The error reported below was in fact caused by a bug in these tests, which
has now been fixed.
Sorry for the false alarm.
Thanks
On Tue, 26 Sept 2023 at 16:42, wrote:
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below.
Hi,
The error reported below was in fact caused by a bug in these tests, which
has now been fixed.
Sorry for the false alarm.
Thanks
On Tue, 26 Sept 2023 at 16:38, wrote:
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below.
Hi,
The error reported below was in fact caused by a bug in these tests, which
has now been fixed.
Sorry for the false alarm.
Thanks
On Tue, 26 Sept 2023 at 16:38, wrote:
> Dear contributor, our automatic CI has detected problems related to your
> patch(es). Please find some details below.
Hi Jonathan,
Thanks for the heads up.
We do run contrib/gcc_update --touch after applying patches, and before
starting the build, but I realize it doesn't help in the case of
bits/version.h
It looks like we should run make update-version?
Is that documented somewhere? (I'm wondering what's the l
== Progress ==
* GCC
- MVE/vectorization: committed patches for vec_pack / vec_unpack
- handling feedback on patch for PR 100757
* GCC upstream validation:
- reported a couple of regressions
== Next ==
Now leaving Linaro, hopefully I can continue to work on:
* MVE auto-vectorization/intrinsics im
== Progress ==
* GCC
- MVE/vectorization: committed patches for vhadd/vrhadd and vclz
- handling feedback on patch for vec_pack / vec_unpack
- PR 100757
* GCC upstream validation:
- reported a couple of regressions
== Next ==
* MVE auto-vectorization/intrinsics improvements
* GCC/cortex-M testing
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- reported a couple of regressions
* GCC
- MVE/vectorization: committed patches for vans
- submitted patch for vhadd/vrhadd
- WIP on vclz / vec_pack / vec_unpack
- PR 100757
== Next ==
* MVE auto-vectorization/intrinsics improvements
* GCC/cortex-M testin
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- reported a couple of regressions
* GCC
- MVE/vectorization: committed patches for vld2/vst2, vld4/st4, vaddv
- WIP on vhadd/vrhadd
== Next ==
* MVE auto-vectorization/intrinsics improvements
* GCC/cortex-M testing improvements & fixes
* GDB/cortex-M
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- reported a couple of regressions
* GCC
- MVE/vectorization: committed patches for vcmp, waiting for
feedback on the remaining patches for vld2/vst2, vld4/st4
- started work on vaddv support
- committed a few testsuite improvement patches
- committed patc
Short week (2.5 days off)
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- discussing update of the list of configs
* GCC
- MVE/vectorization: committing cleanup patches for vcmp, waiting for
feedback on the remaining patches for vcmp, vld2/vst2, vld4/st4
* Misc
- scripts patch reviews
- looking at g
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- Reported a few regressions
- discussing update of the list of configs
- tried qemu-6.0, issue with hwasan testing on aarch64
* GCC
- MVE/vectorization: waiting for feedback on patches for vcmp,
vld2/vst2, vld4/st4
* Misc
- scripts patch reviews
- lookin
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- Reported a few regressions
* GCC
- committed cleanup patches
- sent a few testsuite improvement patches
- MVE/vectorization: Send patches for vcmp, vld2/vst2, vld4/st4
* Misc
- scripts patch reviews
== Next ==
* MVE auto-vectorization/intrinsics improv
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- Reported a few regressions
* GCC
- committed further fix for testcase for PR96770
- sent a few testsuite improvement patches
- resumed work on MVE/auto-vectorization. Added support for vcmp.f16.
Checking fp16 support in previous patches.
* Misc
- script
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- Reported a few regressions
- Reduced build frequency on release branches, now same as trunk:
daily bump and arm/aarch64 "interesting" commits
* GCC
- pinged further fix for testcase for PR96770
- preparing cortex-m55 validation setup
- looking at cmse te
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- No regression to report this week. Issues on gcc-9 and gcc-10
release branches had already been reported by other people.
* GCC
- pinged further fix for testcase for PR96770
- Looking at failures for cortex-M, only found testisms so far
* Misc
- Fixed b
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- Reported minor testsuite issues (eg failures with -mabi=ilp32 on aarch64)
- re-started looking at validation for cortex-m55, realized that qemu
does not support MVE yet
* GCC
- posted further fix for testcase for PR96770
- fixed PR 99786
- committed fix
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- No regression to report this week
* GCC
- testsuite cleanup: committed a patch series
- fixed PR 99727
- filed / discussed PR 99773
- WIP PR 99786
* Misc
== Next ==
* MVE auto-vectorization/intrinsics improvements
* GCC/cortex-M testing improvements &
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- Small improvement to pre-commit testing scripts to allow running a
subset of the tests (and thus save a lot of time)
* GCC
- MVE autovectorization:
- vcmp support of FP types OK.
- testsuite cleanup: looking at current failures, only found issues
with
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- Bisected last week regressions, but there had already been reported/fixed.
* GCC
- MVE autovectorization:
- vcmp support mostly complete. support of FP types looks OK, though
trickier than expected.
- vld2/vst2 and vld4/vst4 done.
* Misc
- stm32 ben
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- a couple of regressions to bisect.
- minor testcase fix
- reported a couple of new failures
* GCC
- MVE autovectorization:
- vcmp support mostly complete. Minor update needed to support FP types.
- working on interleaved vector load/store support
*
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- a few regressions to bisect. Fixed a minor testcase issue
* GCC
- MVE autovectorization: Working on vcmp. After some cleanup &
factorization, the cmp operators work on GCC vectors. I will now
resume work on auto-vectorization.
* Misc
- fixes in stm32 be
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- a few regressions to bisect. Fixed a minor testcase issue
- native validation in Linaro's lab: we still see a few random results
* GCC
- MVE autovectorization: Working on vcmp.
* Misc
- fixes in stm32 benchmarking harness
== Next ==
* MVE auto-vectoriz
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- not really catching up, now ~15 days late due to the numerous
commits. Manually fast-forwarded the latest build to today. I'll
bisect manually for regressions if needed.
- re-enabled native validation in Linaro's lab: we are sending test
results again
*
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- not really catching up, now ~10 days late due to the numerous commits
* GCC
- Neon intrinsics: vceqzq improvement (PR98730) commited
- MVE autovectorization: vorn patch submitted
- opened PR98891 about Neon vectorization regression
* infra:
- reviewed p
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- catching up, still ~1 week late due to the numerous commits
* GCC
- Neon intrinsics: looking at vceqzq improvement (PR98730)
- MVE autovectorization: WIP on vorn and vcmp.
- helping with cortex-m0 libgcc patch validation. Opened PR98779 about
issues in l
== Progress ==
* GCC upstream validation:
- catching up, still ~1 week late due to the numerous commits
* GCC
- Neon intrinsics: vceqq, vceqz and vceqzq for p64 patch: committed
- MVE autovectorization: movmisalign, vshl and vshr: committed. WIP on
next operators.
- opened 2 PRs about missed optim
1 - 100 of 516 matches
Mail list logo
