* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-12-10 13:36 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 10:53 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (19 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-12-10 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-12-10 13:36 ` [Bug testsuite/98225] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-05 10:53 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 18:20 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
` (18 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-05 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
After
commit e9f8a554efe497dd46b8953e580d65e5c023e50c
Author: Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de>
Date: Sun Dec 13 08:24:57 2020 +0100
Fix -save-temp leaking lto files in /tmp
I see a massive increase of FAILs on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and
sparc-sun-solaris2.11,
although similar reports can be found on gcc-testresults for
aarch64-suse-linux-gnu, i686-pc-linux-gnu, x86_64-pc-linux-gnu:
+FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
+FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
+FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
+FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs.ld1_args
+FAIL: outputs lto st mult dumpdir empty dumpbase named:
dir/outputs-1.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
FAIL: outputs lto st mult dumpdir empty dumpbase named:
dir/outputs-1.ltrans0.ltrans_args
+FAIL: outputs lto st mult dumpdir named: dir/outputs-ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
FAIL: outputs lto st mult dumpdir named: dir/outputs-ltrans0.ltrans_args
+FAIL: outputs lto st mult empty dumpbase namedb:
dir/outputs.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st mult empty dumpbase unnamed: a.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st mult namedb: dir/outputs.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st mult unnamed: a.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st sing dumpdir empty dumpbase named:
dir/outputs-0.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st sing dumpdir named: dir/outputs-ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st sing empty dumpbase namedb:
dir/outputs.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st sing empty dumpbase unnamed: a.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st sing namedb: dir/outputs.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
+FAIL: outputs lto st sing unnamed: a.ltrans0.ltrans.args.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-12-10 13:36 ` [Bug testsuite/98225] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 10:53 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-05 18:20 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 18:27 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (17 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-05 18:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Unfortunately I cannot reproduce.
I configured like this:
../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/home/ed/gnu/install --enable-languages=all
and use
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.35.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-05 18:20 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-05 18:27 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-01-05 19:03 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
` (16 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-01-05 18:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Unfortunately I cannot reproduce.
>
> I configured like this:
> ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/home/ed/gnu/install --enable-languages=all
>
> and use
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.35.1
As I mentioned, it reliably FAILs on Solaris with both the native linker
and GNU ld, and in some configurations on Linux, Darwin, and FreeBSD. I
don't know where the common ground between those configs is, and THB
have absolutely no idea what is happening here. This LTO stuff remains
a mystery to me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-05 18:27 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-01-05 19:03 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 19:24 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-05 19:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It is interesting that some tests are reported failing
on the x86_64-pc-linux-gnu platform that I also use.
I really wonder what prevents these failures for me.
Could you say if there the outputs.exp test case
produces additional temp files in the /tmp folder when it fails?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-05 19:03 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-05 19:24 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 19:40 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (14 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-05 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> * Despite -save-temps, the lto-wrapper input objects are removed at the end,
> so I cannot manually rerun lto-wrapper to investigate.
You could modify
gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp
to:
* only run a single 'outest' which is failing (e.g. comment all 'outest' lines
but 'outputs lto st mult dumpdir named')
* Remove 'file delete' in 'proc outest'
Run the test and check which files are under /tmp + test directory - and
compare it with the failing while (which checks with 'file exists' or using
'glob').
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-05 19:24 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-05 19:40 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-01-05 19:57 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-01-05 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #4 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> It is interesting that some tests are reported failing
> on the x86_64-pc-linux-gnu platform that I also use.
Right: it's not the platform per se but something about it or the tools
used.
> I really wonder what prevents these failures for me.
The weird thing is that I've just run runtest --tool gcc outputs.exp in
one of yesterday's build directories (build are currently running) and
the only failures from outputs.exp are
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs.ld1_args
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
Every other failure has vanished.
> Could you say if there the outputs.exp test case
> produces additional temp files in the /tmp folder when it fails?
No: the only things left in /tmp from previous builds are from libgo
make check.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-05 19:40 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-01-05 19:57 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-05 20:32 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (12 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-05 19:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #7 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
when you leave just one of those tests, you can
get somewhat more verbose output by using something like that:
make check-gcc-c RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix/-v/-Wl,-v outputs.exp"
you should see where the collect-ld is invoked:
collect2 version 11.0.0 20210105 (experimental)^M
/home/ed/gnu/gcc-build/gcc/collect-ld @outputs.ld1_args^M
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.35.1^M
The arguments are in a response-file: @outputs.ld1_args
maybe that looks different for you?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-05 19:57 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-05 20:32 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-01-06 10:50 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (11 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-01-05 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #7 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> when you leave just one of those tests, you can
> get somewhat more verbose output by using something like that:
>
> make check-gcc-c RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix/-v/-Wl,-v outputs.exp"
I've just run the corresponding xgcc invocation manually.
> you should see where the collect-ld is invoked:
>
> collect2 version 11.0.0 20210105 (experimental)^M
> /home/ed/gnu/gcc-build/gcc/collect-ld @outputs.ld1_args^M
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.35.1^M
>
> The arguments are in a response-file: @outputs.ld1_args
> maybe that looks different for you?
It certainly does (Solaris ld doesn't support -v, so no -Wl,-v here), as
I found in collect2.c (do_link): the @ files are only passed if
HAVE_GNU_LD and at_file_supplied. The former is certainly false for
Solaris ld, so we'll certainly see no outputs.ld1_args passed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-05 20:32 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-01-06 10:50 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-01-06 20:51 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-01-06 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot
> Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> The arguments are in a response-file: @outputs.ld1_args
>> maybe that looks different for you?
>
> It certainly does (Solaris ld doesn't support -v, so no -Wl,-v here), as
> I found in collect2.c (do_link): the @ files are only passed if
> HAVE_GNU_LD and at_file_supplied. The former is certainly false for
> Solaris ld, so we'll certainly see no outputs.ld1_args passed.
I've now dug a bit further and found two things: In addition to the
previous bootstraps with Solaris ld, I've run another one with GNU ld.
As expected, the outputs.ld1_args FAILs are gone since, unlike Solaris
ld, GNU ld *does* support response files.
On a hunch, I've also run
$ make -j2 check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=outputs.exp
(with gld in use, but this doesn't make a difference as I mentioned) and
lo, the previous FAILs now show up that didn't in a sequential make check-gcc.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-06 10:50 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-01-06 20:51 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-06 21:00 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (9 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-06 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #10 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I tried to bootstrap with
GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.24
but still cannot reproduce the reported
failure ltrans0.ltrans_args / ltrans0.ltrans_args.0
I really wonder what makes the difference.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-06 20:51 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-06 21:00 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-01-06 21:04 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-01-06 21:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #10 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> I tried to bootstrap with
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.24
>
> but still cannot reproduce the reported
> failure ltrans0.ltrans_args / ltrans0.ltrans_args.0
>
> I really wonder what makes the difference.
I've tried on a x86_64-pc-linux-gnu build with a self-compiled GNU ld
2.35: no failure with or without -jN. It must be some sort of tool
issue, but I don't have the slightest idea what it might be.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-06 21:00 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-01-06 21:04 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-06 21:17 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-06 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Aah, now I see (lto-wrapper.c):
if (parallel)
{
fprintf (mstream, "%s:\n\t@%s ", output_name, new_argv[0]);
for (j = 1; new_argv[j] != NULL; ++j)
fprintf (mstream, " '%s'", new_argv[j]);
fprintf (mstream, "\n");
/* If we are not preserving the ltrans input files then
truncate them as soon as we have processed it. This
reduces temporary disk-space usage. */
if (! save_temps)
fprintf (mstream, "\t@-touch -r %s %s.tem > /dev/null 2>&1 "
"&& mv %s.tem %s\n",
input_name, input_name, input_name, input_name);
}
else
{
char argsuffix[sizeof (DUMPBASE_SUFFIX) + 1];
if (save_temps)
snprintf (argsuffix, sizeof (DUMPBASE_SUFFIX),
"ltrans%u.ltrans_args", i);
fork_execute (new_argv[0], CONST_CAST (char **, new_argv),
true, save_temps ? argsuffix : NULL);
maybe_unlink (input_name);
}
IF parallel is true, the "ltrans%u.ltrans_args and the "ltrans%u.ltrans_args.0
is obviously not taken.
AND on my system I use a gnu-make
that does not always pass the jobserver file ids to the sub-makes.
Only when "$(MAKE)" is used.
I already thought about adding something like "#$(MAKE)" somewhere
to un-break that....
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-06 21:04 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-06 21:17 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-06 21:22 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (6 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-06 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
could someone try this for me?
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests
index 80d4b61..7cd755c 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp
@@ -67,6 +67,9 @@ if {[board_info $dest exists output_format]} {
append link_options " additional_flags=-Wl,-oformat,[board_info $dest
output_fo
}
+# avoid influence from jobserver
+unsetenv MAKEFLAGS
+
# For the test named TEST, run the compiler with SOURCES and OPTS, and
# look in DIRS for OUTPUTS. SOURCES is a list of suffixes for source
# files starting with $b in $srcdir/$subdir, OPTS is a string with
Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-06 21:17 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-06 21:22 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-01-07 18:52 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2021-01-06 21:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> could someone try this for me?
This worked fine for me, both with -j2 and without. Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-06 21:22 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2021-01-07 18:52 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-07 19:07 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: dje at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-07 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dje at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2021-01-07
--- Comment #15 from David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'm seeing a number of new testsuite failures on AIX after the
collect2/testsuite change. Do you want a separate PR or use this as well?
They are:
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: extra
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs.ld1_args
I notice that Rainer mentions some ld1_args failures for these same testcases
in Comment #6.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-07 18:52 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-07 19:07 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-07 19:41 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-07 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
| |il/gcc-patches/2021-January
| |/562967.html
--- Comment #16 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #15)
> I'm seeing a number of new testsuite failures on AIX after the
> collect2/testsuite change. Do you want a separate PR or use this as well?
Given that we already identified two different issues here (parallel make check
and linker support for response files), I suggest we keep everything together
for
now.
> They are:
>
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: extra
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs.ld1_args
>
> I notice that Rainer mentions some ld1_args failures for these same
> testcases in Comment #6.
Right. I assume you're using the the native AIX linker and it doesn't support
response files? In that case, the *.ld1_args failures are the same issue I'm
seeing with Solaris ld (which is in the same boat in this respect).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-07 19:07 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-07 19:41 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-07 22:26 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-07 19:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #17 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #15)
> I'm seeing a number of new testsuite failures on AIX after the
> collect2/testsuite change. Do you want a separate PR or use this as well?
>
> They are:
>
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
> FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
the extra is maybe a different file that gets created.
Can you look up in the log file, the line directly after the FAIL
which files you see there?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-07 19:41 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-07 22:26 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-11 12:29 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-11 12:32 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: dje at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-07 22:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #18 from David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
PASS: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs-outputs-0.i
PASS: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs-outputs-0.s
PASS: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs-outputs-0.o
PASS: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs.args.0
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs.ld1_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp namedb: outputs.exe
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp namedb: extra
outputs.gcc_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp namedb: std out
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.i
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.s
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.o
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.i
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.s
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.o
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.args.0
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.exe
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
outputs.gcc_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: std out
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.i
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.s
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.o
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.i
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.s
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.o
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-args.0
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-args.1
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.args.2
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.exe
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
outputs.gcc_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: std out
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.i
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.s
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-1.o
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.i
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.s
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-outputs-2.o
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-args.0
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs-args.1
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.args.2
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.args.3
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.ld1_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: outputs.exe
FAIL: outputs exe savetmp named2: extra
outputs.gcc_args
PASS: outputs exe savetmp named2: std out
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-07 22:26 ` dje at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-11 12:29 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-11 12:32 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-11 12:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Bernd Edlinger <edlinger@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6ebf79fcd4cfb43353e6a000f700b07295e78026
commit r11-6588-g6ebf79fcd4cfb43353e6a000f700b07295e78026
Author: Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de>
Date: Thu Jan 7 09:37:32 2021 +0100
testsuite: Fix test failures from outputs.exp [PR98225]
The .ld1_args file is not created when HAVE_GNU_LD is false.
The ltrans0.ltrans_arg file is not created when the make jobserver
is available, so remove the MAKEFLAGS variable.
Add an exception for *.gcc_args files similar to the
exception for *.cdtor.* files.
Limit both exceptions to targets that define EH_FRAME_THROUGH_COLLECT2.
That means although the test case does not use C++ constructors
or destructors it is still using dwarf2 frame info.
2021-01-11 Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de>
PR testsuite/98225
* gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp: Unset MAKEFLAGS.
Expect .ld1_args only when GNU LD is used.
Add an exception for *.gcc_args files.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [Bug testsuite/98225] gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL
2020-12-10 13:36 [Bug testsuite/98225] New: gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp ltrans_args tests FAIL ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (19 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-11 12:29 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-11 12:32 ` edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org
20 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-11 12:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98225
Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #20 from Bernd Edlinger <edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
should be fixed now.
Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread