From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24584 invoked by alias); 14 Dec 2018 08:21:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24572 invoked by uid 89); 14 Dec 2018 08:21:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,TIME_LIMIT_EXCEEDED autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2 spammy=H*Ad:U*andrew X-HELO: gate.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:20:58 +0000 Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id wBE8KqBY015038; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 02:20:52 -0600 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id wBE8KoKv015035; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 02:20:50 -0600 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:21:00 -0000 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Jeff Law Cc: Richard Biener , andrew@codesourcery.com, Jakub Jelinek , GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Delete powerpcspe Message-ID: <20181214082049.GK3803@gate.crashing.org> References: <4b748e966e3eeab17f102e1a0112616f2015bf95.1543869218.git.segher@kernel.crashing.org> <20181203214804.GE12380@tucnak> <0adf63ed-1fca-cfa1-414b-9b022478b6fd@codesourcery.com> <20181210201310.GH3803@gate.crashing.org> <07e3d956-a21c-1519-121a-b32f2f74bc78@redhat.com> <20181212173333.GN3803@gate.crashing.org> <68985bef-f065-85b9-5df4-3f76437b306a@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <68985bef-f065-85b9-5df4-3f76437b306a@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-12/txt/msg01019.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 09:49:51AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 12/12/18 10:33 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 11:36:29AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 2:37 PM Jeff Law wrote: > >>> One way to deal with these problems is to create a fake simulator that > >>> always returns success. That's what my tester does for the embedded > >>> targets. That allows us to do reliable compile-time tests as well as > >>> the various scan-whatever tests. > >>> > >>> It would be trivial to start sending those results to gcc-testresults. > >> > >> I think it would be more useful if the execute testing would be > >> reported as UNSUPPORTED rather than simply PASS w/o being > >> sure it does. > > > > Yes. > Yes, but I don't think we've got a reasonable way to do that in the > existing dejagnu framework. I think you can have your board's ${board}_load just do return [list "unresolved" ""] or something like that. > > If results are posted to gcc-testresults then other people can get a > > feel whether the port is detoriating, and at what rate. If no results > > are posted we just have to assume the worst. Most people do not have > > the time (or setup) to test it for themselves. > Yup. I wish I had the time to extract more of the data the tester is > gathering and produce this kind of info. > > I have not made it a priority to try and address all the issues I've > seen in the tester. We have some ports that are incredibly flaky > (epiphany for example), and many that have a lot of failures, but are > stable in their set of failures. > > My goal to date has mostly been to identify regressions. I'm not even > able to keep up with that. For example s390/s390x have been failing for > about a week with their kernel builds. sparc, i686, aarch64 are > consistently tripping over regressions. ia64 hasn't worked since we put > in qsort consistency checking, etc etc. About a third of kernel builds have failed (for my configs) this whole stage 1 and stage 3... Hopefully it will be better in stage 4. Segher