public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
@ 2021-01-14 12:16 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-14 12:17 ` [Bug libstdc++/98678] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 more replies)
0 siblings, 8 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-14 12:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
Bug ID: 98678
Summary: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ro at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: i386-pc-solaris2.11, x86_64-pc-solaris2.11,
arm-none-linux-gnueabi, hppa-unknown-linux-gnu,
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
The 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc reliably FAILs on 32 and 64-bit
Solaris/x86:
/vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc:95:
int main(): Assertion 'wait_until_sys_min < (ready * 100)' failed.
wait_for(0s): 11892ns for 200 calls, avg 59.46ns per call
wait_until(system_clock minimum): 1304458ns for 200 calls, avg 6522.29ns per
call
wait_until(steady_clock minimum): 1403221ns for 200 calls, avg 7016.1ns per
call
wait_until(system_clock epoch): 3343806ns for 200 calls, avg 16719ns per call
wait_until(steady_clock epoch: 2959581ns for 200 calls, avg 14797.9ns per call
wait_for when ready: 10969ns for 200 calls, avg 54.845ns per call
While I don't see the failure on Solaris/SPARC, there are reports for a couple
of other targets on gcc-testresults. However, the Linux/x86_64 ones seem to
only affect the gcc-10 branch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-14 12:17 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-14 12:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-14 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-14 12:17 ` [Bug libstdc++/98678] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-14 12:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-19 21:27 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-14 12:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2021-01-14
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The relevant part of the std::future code on the gcc-10 branch is very
different, so the timings are different on the branch too.
This test is a bit tricky. The whole point is to check that performance of one
operation is acceptable compared to a baseline. But the definition of
"acceptable" and the relative difference between the speed of the different
operations varies with arch. We could just increase the tolerances, but then we
allow worse performance on the targets that don't need it. Maybe we want to
change the 30 and 100 magic numbers to depend on the target.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-14 12:17 ` [Bug libstdc++/98678] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-14 12:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-04-19 21:27 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-27 11:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: seurer at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-04-19 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
Target|i386-pc-solaris2.11, |i386-pc-solaris2.11,
|x86_64-pc-solaris2.11, |x86_64-pc-solaris2.11,
|arm-none-linux-gnueabi, |arm-none-linux-gnueabi,
|hppa-unknown-linux-gnu, |hppa-unknown-linux-gnu,
|x86_64-pc-linux-gnu |x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,
| |powerpc64-linux-gnu
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
FYI I am seeing this every so often on powerpc64 BE on an older power 7
machine, too.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-04-19 21:27 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-04-27 11:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-28 7:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-04-27 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|11.0 |11.2
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 11.1 has been released, retargeting bugs to GCC 11.2.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-04-27 11:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-07-28 7:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-21 7:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-07-28 7:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|11.2 |11.3
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 11.2 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 11.3
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-07-28 7:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-04-21 7:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-04-05 16:51 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 10:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-04-21 7:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|11.3 |11.4
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 11.3 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 11.4.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-04-21 7:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-04-05 16:51 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 10:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: danglin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-04-05 16:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
John David Anglin <danglin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from John David Anglin <danglin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fails consistently with timeout on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu. Increasing timeout
doesn't help.
dave@mx3210:~/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite$ time
./poll.exe
wait_for(0s): 10000098ns for 169420 calls, avg 59.0255ns per call
wait_until(system_clock minimum): 40000394ns for 169420 calls, avg 236.102ns
per call
wait_until(steady_clock minimum): 50000492ns for 169420 calls, avg 295.127ns
per call
wait_until(system_clock epoch): 1695216533549ns for 169420 calls, avg
1.0006e+07ns per call
wait_until(steady_clock epoch: 1694205876189ns for 169420 calls, avg 1e+07ns
per call
wait_for when ready: 0ns for 169420 calls, avg 0ns per call
/home/dave/gnu/gcc/gcc/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc:129:
int main(): Assertion 'wait_for_0 < (ready * 30)' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
real 56m29.632s
user 0m5.355s
sys 0m8.722s
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/98678] 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2023-04-05 16:51 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-29 10:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-29 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98678
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|11.4 |11.5
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 11.4 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 11.5.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-05-29 10:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-01-14 12:16 [Bug libstdc++/98678] New: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc execution test FAILs ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-14 12:17 ` [Bug libstdc++/98678] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-14 12:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-19 21:27 ` seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-27 11:40 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-28 7:05 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-21 7:48 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-04-05 16:51 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-29 10:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.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).