binutils builder status (Was: Adding binutils to the GNU Toolchain buildbot on sourceware)

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

Hi binutils hackers (dropped gdb),

https://builder.sourceware.org now has 6 binutils builders:
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders?tags=binutils
debian-amd64, fedora-x86_64, fedora-s390x, debian-ppc64, debian-armhf
and debian-arm64.  I like to add a fedora-ppc64le one once that one
has enough disk space.

The first two are configured with --enable-targets=all. The others
not because they are too slow and/or --enable-targets=all causes
extra failures.

All build all-gas all-ld all-bintuils all-gold fine.  fedora-x86_64
and binutils-debian-ppc64 pass the whole testsuite check-gas check-ld
check-binutils.

The gas and binutils testsuites seem clean on all builders. But the ld
testsuite does see some unexpected failures or passes on some
builders. It would be great if we could fix these. If not it might
make sense to run the ld testsuite separately.

Note that you can see the used linux kernel, gcc, binutils versions on
the workers page:
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/workers

binutils-fedora-s390x
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders/binutils-fedora-s390x
has 2 unexpected ld failures:
FAIL: Run pr19719 fun undefined
FAIL: pr26580-3

binutils-debian-amd64
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders/binutils-debian-amd64
has 2 unexpected ld failures:
FAIL: Run p_align-1b with PIE
FAIL: Run p_align-1d with -Wl,-z,max-page-size=0x1000 with PIE

binutils-debian-arm64
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders/binutils-debian-arm64
has 1 unexpected success:
XPASS: Run pr19719 fun undefined

binutils-debian-armhf
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders/binutils-debian-armhf
has 8 unexpected ld failures and 7 unexpected successes
XPASS: Run pr19719 fun undefined
FAIL: Common symbol override ifunc test 1a
FAIL: Common symbol override ifunc test 1b
FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841b.so
FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841c.so
FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841bn.so (-z now)
FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841cn.so (-z now)
FAIL: Run pr23169a
FAIL: Run pr23169d
XPASS: visibility (hidden_undef) (non PIC)
XPASS: visibility (hidden_undef) (non PIC, load offset)
XPASS: visibility (hidden_undef) (PIC main, non PIC so)
XPASS: visibility (protected_undef) (non PIC)
XPASS: visibility (protected_undef) (non PIC, load offset)
XPASS: visibility (protected_undef) (PIC main, non PIC so)

The binutils-debian-armhf builder is also the slowest (takes 15
minutes). The rest take a few minutes. They should sent email once a
new failure occurs (or if one if the currently failing builders starts
passing).

There is also one build and check everything builder
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders/binutils-gdb-fedrawhide-x86_64
I haven't looked at the test results yet, but they are all stored in
the bunsendb.git for later analysis. This builder doesn't sent emails
on bad builds. It also takes a very long time to run (from 1 to 7 hours).

Cheers,

Mark