From: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
Bernd Schmidt <bernds@codesourcery.com>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
richard.sandiford@arm.com
Subject: Re: parallel check output changes?
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 12:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54240905.70600@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5423065F.7020308@redhat.com>
On 09/24/2014 01:58 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 09/24/2014 12:29 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>>
>
> AH. interesting.
>
> The third run has a gcc.sum that is exactly the same as the first run.
> so only the second run differs, and it seems to be from an
> alphabetical sort. So run 3 and 1 match.
> the gfortran.sum from the third run is identical to the *second* run,
> but it is different from the *first* run. so run 2 and 3 match.
>
> the two runs that match (2nd and 3rd run) look like:
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2 (test
> for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2
> execution test
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single (test for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single execution test
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2 (test
> for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2
> execution test
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single (test for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single execution test
>
> and the odd one out (firstrun:)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single (test for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single execution test
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2 (test
> for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_1.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2
> execution test
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single (test for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2
> -lcaf_single execution test
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2 (test
> for excess errors)
> PASS: gfortran.dg/coarray/this_image_2.f90 -fcoarray=single -O2
> execution test
>
> looks like the first run was sorted, and the other 2 weren't.
>
> There must be some condition under which we don't sort the results? or
> another place which needs to be tweaked to do the sort as well...?
>
> Andrew
>
So to be fair, I could use test_summary, but I think the concern is
warranted because if this inconsistent ordering can happen to PASS, I
would expect the same non-deterministic behaviour if those tests happen
to FAIL. we just have far less FAILS so we aren't seeing it with
test_summary at the moment...
Aggregating all my .sum files, I see a sampling of about 257,000 PASSs,
whereas I see a total of 141 FAILs. FAILs only account for < 0.06% of
the output. ( I'm getting an average of about 510 mis-ordered PASSs, so
it only affects a small portion of them as well.)
I would think the output of .sum needs to be consistent from one run to
the next in order for test_summary to consistently report its results as
well.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-25 12:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-18 12:56 Andrew MacLeod
2014-09-18 13:08 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-09-18 13:05 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-09-18 15:45 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-09-18 17:33 ` Bernd Schmidt
2014-09-18 17:36 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-09-18 18:45 ` Segher Boessenkool
2014-09-19 9:37 ` Segher Boessenkool
2014-09-19 16:32 ` Mike Stump
2014-09-23 15:33 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-09-23 15:43 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-09-24 14:55 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-09-24 16:11 ` Segher Boessenkool
2014-09-24 16:29 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-09-24 17:59 ` Andrew MacLeod
2014-09-25 12:22 ` Andrew MacLeod [this message]
2014-09-25 17:02 ` Segher Boessenkool
2014-10-02 16:47 ` Segher Boessenkool
2014-10-02 17:05 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-10-02 17:46 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-10-02 18:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2014-10-04 10:32 ` Richard Sandiford
2014-10-05 17:53 ` Mike Stump
2014-10-02 18:15 ` Segher Boessenkool
2014-10-02 19:05 ` Andrew MacLeod
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54240905.70600@redhat.com \
--to=amacleod@redhat.com \
--cc=bernds@codesourcery.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).