From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29278 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2011 15:17:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 29260 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Mar 2011 15:16:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vw0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-vw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.212.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:16:54 +0000 Received: by vws2 with SMTP id 2so987883vws.20 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:16:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.91.210 with SMTP id cg18mr1224690vdb.19.1301066213268; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.74.141 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:16:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110314172228.GO30899@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <20110321221214.GB11563@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:47:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Second GCC 4.6.0 release candidate is now available From: Ramana Radhakrishnan To: Michael Hope Cc: Jakub Jelinek , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg00404.txt.bz2 Hi Michael, Thanks for running these. I spent some time this morning looking through the results, they largely look ok though I don't have much perspective on the the objc/ obj-c++ failures. These failures here For v7-a , A9 and Neon - these failures below: > Running target unix > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer (te= st for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointe= r compilation failed to produce executable > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -fun= roll-loops (test for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointe= r -funroll-loops compilation failed to produce executable > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -fun= roll-all-loops -finline-functions (test for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointe= r -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions compilation failed to produce exec= utable > FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess erro= rs) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -g compilation fai= led to produce executable > FAIL: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer (test for = excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer comp= ilation failed to produce executable > FAIL: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-lo= ops (test for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funr= oll-loops compilation failed to produce executable > FAIL: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-al= l-loops -finline-functions (test for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funr= oll-all-loops -finline-functions compilation failed to produce executable > FAIL: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -g compilation failed to = produce executable are caused by a broken assembler. All these tests appear to pass fine in a cross environment on my machine. These all appear to fail because of the assembler failing to assemble something like vmov.i64 d9,#-4294967296 which is vmov.i64 d9,0xffffffff00000000 and a valid instruction. I think your assembler needs an update Otherwise the testresults for A9 appear to be largely in line with other results. =46rom v5t. > FAIL: gcc.dg/c90-intconst-1.c (internal compiler error) > FAIL: gcc.dg/c90-intconst-1.c (test for excess errors) The c90 testfails in your v5t run appear to be some kind of NFS glitch because the compiler fails to spawn from dejagnu. I tried logging into ursa2 and tried out the same test after fettling with paths etc and it just seemed to work. I'm still looking through the other results but I haven't spotted anything obvious broken yet. cheers Ramana On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Michael Hope wro= te: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> A second GCC 4.6.0 release candidate is available at: >> >> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6.0-RC-20110321/ >> >> Please test the tarballs and report any problems to Bugzilla. >> CC me on the bugs if you believe they are regressions from >> previous releases severe enough to block the 4.6.0 release. >> >> If no more blockers appear I'd like to release GCC 4.6.0 >> early next week. > > The RC bootstraps C, C++, Fortran, Obj-C, and Obj-C++ on > ARMv7/Cortex-A9/Thumb-2/NEON, ARMv5T/ARM/softfp, ARMv5T/Thumb/softfp, > and ARMv4T/ARM/softfp. =A0I'm afraid I haven't reviewed the test results > (Richard? Ramana?) > > See: > =A0http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg02298.html > =A0http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg02391.html > =A0http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg02394.html > =A0http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg02393.html > > and: > =A0http://builds.linaro.org/toolchain/gcc-4.6.0-RC-20110321/logs/ > > -- Michael >