public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug testsuite/42997]  New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
@ 2010-02-08 12:00 rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-08 12:01 ` [Bug testsuite/42997] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (9 more replies)
  0 siblings, 10 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-02-08 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

Running target unix/
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -O2  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for
exces
s errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (internal
compi
ler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for
exces
s errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/Wunreachable-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/pr42706.c (test for excess errors)

FAIL: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
WARNING: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  compilation failed to
p
roduce executable


-- 
           Summary: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.4.4
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: ice-checking
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: testsuite
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-02-08 12:01 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-08 13:51 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
                   ` (8 subsequent siblings)
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-02-08 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-02-08 12:01 -------
Which is a remainder that devs should enable checking when testing patches for
branches ...


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-08 12:01 ` [Bug testsuite/42997] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-02-08 13:51 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
  2010-02-08 21:18 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
                   ` (7 subsequent siblings)
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-02-08 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-02-08 13:51 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
> Running target unix/
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -O2  (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for
> exces
> s errors)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42632.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)

It passed for me on Linux/x86.

> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (internal compiler error)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (internal compiler error)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (internal
> compi
> ler error)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for
> exces
> s errors)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (internal compiler error)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (internal compiler error)
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)

It passed for me on Linux/x86.

> FAIL: gcc.dg/Wunreachable-2.c (test for excess errors)

It passed for me on Linux/x86.

> FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/pr42706.c (test for excess errors)

Removed.

> 
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  (internal compiler error)
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  compilation failed to
> p
> roduce executable
> 

See:

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42309#c8


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-08 12:01 ` [Bug testsuite/42997] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-08 13:51 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-02-08 21:18 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
  2010-02-10 14:09 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
                   ` (6 subsequent siblings)
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: sezeroz at gmail dot com @ 2010-02-08 21:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #3 from sezeroz at gmail dot com  2010-02-08 21:18 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (internal compiler error)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (internal compiler error)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (internal
> > compi
> > ler error)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for
> > exces
> > s errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (internal compiler error)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (internal compiler error)
> > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)
> 
> It passed for me on Linux/x86.
> 

Fails for me both on i686- and x86_64-linux.

> > FAIL: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  (internal compiler error)
> > FAIL: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
> > WARNING: gfortran.dg/subref_array_pointer_2.f90  -O3 -g  compilation failed to
> > p
> > roduce executable
> > 
> 
> See:
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42309#c8
> 

Fails for me on x86_64- but not for i686-linux.


-- 

sezeroz at gmail dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sezeroz at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-02-08 21:18 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
@ 2010-02-10 14:09 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
  2010-02-10 14:30 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
                   ` (5 subsequent siblings)
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-02-10 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-02-10 14:09 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (internal compiler error)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O1  (test for excess errors)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (internal compiler error)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O2  (test for excess errors)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (internal
> > > compi
> > > ler error)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  (test for
> > > exces
> > > s errors)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (internal compiler error)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -O3 -g  (test for excess errors)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (internal compiler error)
> > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)
> > 
> > It passed for me on Linux/x86.
> > 
> 
> Fails for me both on i686- and x86_64-linux.
> 

What are the error messages?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-02-10 14:09 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-02-10 14:30 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
  2010-02-10 14:40 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
                   ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: sezeroz at gmail dot com @ 2010-02-10 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #5 from sezeroz at gmail dot com  2010-02-10 14:29 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
[...]
> > > > FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c  -Os  (test for excess errors)
> > > 
> > > It passed for me on Linux/x86.
> > > 
> > 
> > Fails for me both on i686- and x86_64-linux.
> > 
> 
> What are the error messages?
> 

Doesn't fail since rev. 156619:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&sortby=date&revision=156619


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-02-10 14:30 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
@ 2010-02-10 14:40 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
  2010-02-10 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-02-10 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-02-10 14:39 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> Which is a remainder that devs should enable checking when testing patches for
> branches ...
> 

I am using the same configuration for both trunk and release branch:

--enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld

Why should checking be enabled only for release branches?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (5 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-02-10 14:40 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-02-10 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-10 14:57 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-02-10 14:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-02-10 14:49 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Which is a remainder that devs should enable checking when testing patches for
> > branches ...
> > 
> 
> I am using the same configuration for both trunk and release branch:
> 
> --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld
> 
> Why should checking be enabled only for release branches?

Because if you backport ice-checking fixes testcases you should verify if
they really do not ICE on the branch - which requires checking to be enabled.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (6 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-02-10 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-02-10 14:57 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
  2010-02-16 10:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-16 11:00 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com @ 2010-02-10 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2010-02-10 14:57 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > Which is a remainder that devs should enable checking when testing patches for
> > > branches ...
> > > 
> > 
> > I am using the same configuration for both trunk and release branch:
> > 
> > --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld
> > 
> > Why should checking be enabled only for release branches?
> 
> Because if you backport ice-checking fixes testcases you should verify if
> they really do not ICE on the branch - which requires checking to be enabled.

I see. Your comment is meant to gcc.c-torture/compile/pr42705.c.
I will keep it in mind.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (7 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-02-10 14:57 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
@ 2010-02-16 10:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-02-16 11:00 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-02-16 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-02-16 10:39 -------
Fixed.


-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.4.4


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

* [Bug testsuite/42997] [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking
  2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (8 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-02-16 10:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-02-16 11:00 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
  9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-02-16 11:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-02-16 10:59 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> Fixed.
> 
Richard,

With one thing and another this slipped my mind.

Sorry

Paul


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42997


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2010-02-16 11:00 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-02-08 12:00 [Bug testsuite/42997] New: [4.4 Regression] Backported tests fail with checking rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-02-08 12:01 ` [Bug testsuite/42997] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-02-08 13:51 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-02-08 21:18 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
2010-02-10 14:09 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-02-10 14:30 ` sezeroz at gmail dot com
2010-02-10 14:40 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-02-10 14:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-02-10 14:57 ` hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
2010-02-16 10:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-02-16 11:00 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).