Re: parallel check output changes?

[Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com>]

On 09/24/2014 12:10 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:54:57AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>> On 09/23/2014 11:33 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>> Your patch instead sorts based on the full test name, including options,
>>> which means that the output no longer matches what you'd get from a
>>> non-parallel run.  AFAICT, it also no longer matches what you'd get from
>>> the .sh version.  That might be OK, just thought I'd mention it.
> With the parallellisation changes the output was pretty random order.  My
> patch made that a fixed order again, albeit a different one from before.
>
>> Is this suppose to be resolved now?  I'm still seeing some issues with a
>> branch cut from mainline from yesterday.   This is from the following
>> sequence:
>>
>> check out revision 215511 , build, make -j16 check, make -j16 check,
>> then compare all the .sum files:
> I don't understand what exactly you did; you have left out some steps
> I think?
>
What?  no.. like what?  check out a tree, basic configure and build from 
scratch (./configure --verbose, make -j16 all)  and then run make check 
twice in a row.. literally "make -j16 -i check".  nothing in between. so 
the compiler and toolchain are exactly the same. and different results.  
same way Ive done it forever.  except I am still getting some  different 
results from run to run.  target is a normal build-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

what I'm saying is something still isn't all getting sorted all the time 
(maybe if a section wasn't split up, it doesn't sort?), or all the 
patches to fix it aren't in, or there is something else still amok.  
Notice it isn't options that is the problem this time.. its the trailing 
line number of the test case warning. One is in numerical order, the 
other is in alphabetical order.

Im running it a third time now.. we'll see if its different than both 
the others or not.

Andrew