gm2
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Gm2] latest regression tests


From: Michael Lambert
Subject: Re: [Gm2] latest regression tests
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:49:54 -0400

Hi Gaius,

I'm still seeing

# of expected passes            5964
# of unexpected failures        60
# of unresolved testcases       12

I think this is the culprit in the six extra failures:

FAIL: gm2/pim/options/optimize/run/pass/testadd.mod compilation,  -g
Link libraries are:
ld: in /var/folders/5r/5rG8VggWHx4wBa0Sofcs6U+++TI/-Tmp-// cciNl0KL.a(addition.o)
, not a valid mach-o object file
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

(I'll forward the entire output to Gaius)

A couple of other notes for Mac OS X/Intel:

o Paranoid passes.

o On Mac/Intel the assembler has changed from vanilla gcc 4.1.2, so the following patch is needed for the diffs to work (the generated code is fine without them):

--- gcc-4.1.2/gcc/config/i386/i386.c.sav 2006-11-17 02:01:22.000000000 -0500
+++ gcc-4.1.2/gcc/config/i386/i386.c    2008-04-22 12:59:31.000000000 -0400
@@ -16666,7 +16666,7 @@
     {
fprintf (file, "\tcall LPC$%d\nLPC$%d:\tpopl %%eax\n", label, label); fprintf (file, "\tmovl %s-LPC$%d(%%eax),%%edx\n", lazy_ptr_name, label);
-      fprintf (file, "\tjmp %%edx\n");
+      fprintf (file, "\tjmp *%%edx\n");
     }
   else
     fprintf (file, "\tjmp *%s\n", lazy_ptr_name);

Since there are conditionals around the above code anyway, I think it should probably be put into the "official" gm2/patches/gcc/4.1.2 directory.

Michael

On 30 Apr 2008, at 09:15, Gaius Mulley wrote:

Hi Michael,

thanks for the report - I still get the above arrayhuge.mod failure -
probably not macos specific.  Looks like the two systems are at least
running the same tests :-)

I don't quite remember where I need to make changes (I vaguely recall
that you once sent me a piece of code to determine the appropriate
values).

I think this is due to a bug in cast - which I believe I've fixed.
Certainly on i[456]86 GNU/Linux it passes. Would it be possible for you
to run this again with the latest snapshot?

I'm currently getting these results from a 32 bit GNU/Linux (Debian
Etch) system:

# of expected passes            5970
# of unexpected failures        54
# of unresolved testcases       12

Thanks,
Gaius





reply via email to

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