avr-gcc-list
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] More results from the testsuite with avrtest


From: Paulo Marques
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] More results from the testsuite with avrtest
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:14:25 +0000
User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.2)

Quoting Andrew Hutchinson <address@hidden>:

Here are my test results using Paulo simulator.

Seems I have more tests!

I'm now running from SVN, so I'm always testing the latest version, although my initial report was for gcc 4.2.2.

One thing I noticed is that almost everyday there is a new test added to the testsuite. So, if we're running a svn version from a month ago, many tests may have entered, or may have been marked as unsuported in the meantime.

I may have less failures as I did fix a bug I found while sorting out test patterns. The rest look the same as Paulo found.

Ok, to try to synchronize with you, so that our tests are consistent, I'm running a test against svn revision 131704 (from today).

Changes I've made so far to solve some of the failures:

- created a sys/types.h with:
    #include <inttypes.h>
    #include <stdint.h>

- changed ldflags definition in atmega128-sim.exp to:
set_board_info ldflags "/home/pmarques/dejagnuboards/exit.c -Wl,-u,vfprintf -lprintf_flt -Wl,-Tbss=0x802000,--defsym=__heap_end=0x80ffff" the "-Wl,-Tbss=0x802000,--defsym=__heap_end=0x80ffff" part points the bss to external RAM, so that we have 4kb of just data + stack and 56k of BSS. This allows some of the tests that need a little more memory to run.

- changed the stack size definition to half the internal RAM:
set_board_info gcc,stack_size 2048

- already applied this patch to gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/pr23484-chk.c:

--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/pr23484-chk.c (revision 131704)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/pr23484-chk.c  (working copy)
@@ -41,8 +41,8 @@
    abort ();

  memset (buf, 'L', sizeof (buf));
-  if (snprintf (buf, l1 ? sizeof (buf) : 4, "%d", l1 + 65536) != 5
-      || memcmp (buf, "655\0LLLL", 8))
+  if (snprintf (buf, l1 ? sizeof (buf) : 4, "%d", l1 + 32760) != 5
+      || memcmp (buf, "327\0LLLL", 8))
    abort ();

  if (chk_calls)


The result of running 'make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=atmega128-sim --all execute.exp"' under these conditions is:

               === gcc Summary ===

# of expected passes            11799
# of unexpected failures        52
# of unresolved testcases       23
# of unsupported tests          682
/home/pmarques/Desktop/gcc-4.2.2/svn/obj/gcc/xgcc version 4.3.0 20080119 (experimental) (GCC)

The tests that fail for me are:

20010122-1.c execution,  -O0
20010122-1.c execution,  -O1
20010122-1.c execution,  -O2
20010122-1.c execution,  -O3 -g
20010122-1.c execution,  -Os
built-in-setjmp.c execution,  -O2
built-in-setjmp.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
built-in-setjmp.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
built-in-setjmp.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions
built-in-setjmp.c execution,  -O3 -g
built-in-setjmp.c execution,  -Os
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation,  -O0
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation,  -O1
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation,  -O2
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation,  -O3 -g
builtin-bitops-1.c compilation,  -Os
ffs-1.c compilation,  -O0
ffs-1.c compilation,  -O1
ffs-1.c compilation,  -O2
ffs-1.c compilation,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
ffs-1.c compilation,  -O3 -g
ffs-1.c compilation,  -Os
ffs-2.c compilation,  -O0
ffs-2.c compilation,  -O1
ffs-2.c compilation,  -O2
ffs-2.c compilation,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
ffs-2.c compilation,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
ffs-2.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions
ffs-2.c compilation,  -O3 -g
ffs-2.c compilation,  -Os
float-floor.c execution,  -O0
float-floor.c execution,  -O1
float-floor.c execution,  -O2
float-floor.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
float-floor.c execution,  -O3 -g
float-floor.c execution,  -Os
multi-ix.c compilation,  -O0
pr17377.c execution,  -O0
pr17377.c execution,  -O1
pr17377.c execution,  -O2
pr17377.c execution,  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
pr17377.c execution,  -O3 -g
pr17377.c execution,  -Os
pr22493-1.c execution,  -O1
pr22493-1.c execution,  -O2
pr22493-1.c execution,  -Os
pr27364.c execution,  -O1
pr27364.c execution,  -O2
pr27364.c execution,  -Os


Unresolved are all missing float function - or mmix? where data is to large (causes 8 unresolved)

If you mean the missing __clzhi2, __ctzhi2, etc., these are bit operations that are missing from libgcc. Some of them might be used by the floating point emulation, though.

Importantly, I looks like my other compiler patches work too!

Great :)

              === gcc Summary ===

# of expected passes            11663
# of unexpected failures        59
# of unresolved testcases       30
# of unsupported tests          676

These numbers do look familiar, so there aren't probably much differences between our results.

I've reported the fail with test pr27364.c. Here's the bug report:

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34916

Please append your reduced test case there. Your test case is a really scary one, I must say.

--
Paulo Marques


----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]