[Bug fortran/56203] New: gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[Bug fortran/56203] New: gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[ro at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

             Bug #: 56203
           Summary: gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: ro@gcc.gnu.org
              Host: sparc*-*-solaris2.*
            Target: sparc*-*-solaris2.*
             Build: sparc*-*-solaris2.*


I often see the gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 test time out on slower SPARC
machines (like 1.2 GHz UltraSPARC-T2) at -O3.

On an otherwise idle machine, compilation takes

real        2:25.18
user        2:16.64
sys            1.28

which is already half the default timeout.  If the machine becomes loaded, this
easily gets above the limit.  Maybe the testcase can be stripped down a bit or
split to avoid this.

  Rainer

[Bug fortran/56203] gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-01-07
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
On my slowest machine (G5 1.8Ghz) I get

49.043u 2.525s 0:56.29 91.5%    0+0k 41+25io 2817pf+0w

Is it really worth the work? Could you provide a suitable splitting if yes, or
close the PR as WONTFIX if no?

[Bug fortran/56203] gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
Without feedback I'll close this PR as WONTFIX.

[Bug fortran/56203] gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
"dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Without feedback I'll close this PR as WONTFIX.

This has become more pronounced with increased gfortran testing
parallelism.  I'll provide more feedback next week.

    Rainer

[Bug fortran/56203] gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz
                   |                            |.ch

--- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #4)
> This has become more pronounced with increased gfortran testing
> parallelism.  I'll provide more feedback next week.

Maybe post a -ftime-report, I think it might be a compile time hog ? Here, it
takes about 4s at -O3, the largest single pass is:

alias stmt walking      :   1.89 (42%) usr   0.01 (11%) sys   1.95 (42%) wall  
   46 kB ( 0%) ggc

The testcase is really not a large program, a handwritten 300 lines of code,
working on small arrays.

[Bug fortran/56203] gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #5 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> ---
> (In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #4)
>> This has become more pronounced with increased gfortran testing
>> parallelism.  I'll provide more feedback next week.
>
> Maybe post a -ftime-report, I think it might be a compile time hog ? Here, it
> takes about 4s at -O3, the largest single pass is:
>
> alias stmt walking      :   1.89 (42%) usr   0.01 (11%) sys   1.95 (42%) wall  
>    46 kB ( 0%) ggc
>
> The testcase is really not a large program, a handwritten 300 lines of code,
> working on small arrays.

I've tested on two systems with -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer:

* 1.2 GHz UltraSPARC-T2:

real        1:34.16
user        1:33.32
sys            0.43

 phase opt and generate  :  93.17 (99%) usr   0.40 (95%) sys  93.58 (99%) wall 
 31673 kB (93%) ggc

 alias stmt walking      :  30.76 (33%) usr   0.03 ( 7%) sys  30.84 (33%) wall 
    25 kB ( 0%) ggc

* 1.35 GHz UltraSPARC-IV:

real          49.37
user          44.41
sys            0.47

 phase opt and generate  :  44.40 (99%) usr   0.33 (97%) sys  47.62 (99%) wall 
 31673 kB (93%) ggc

 alias stmt walking      :  12.93 (29%) usr   0.02 ( 6%) sys  13.05 (27%) wall 
    25 kB ( 0%) ggc

    Rainer

[Bug fortran/56203] gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
Rainer,

Unless you provide a splitting that works on your slow machines, I don't see
the point to keep this PR open.

[Bug fortran/56203] gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90 times out on Solaris/SPARC

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56203

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
No feedback, closing as WONTFIX.