* testsuite requires LTO? @ 2022-04-11 23:51 Steve Kargl 2022-04-12 7:07 ` Richard Biener 2022-04-12 7:41 ` Andreas Schwab 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2022-04-11 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc If I configure gcc with the following ../gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \ --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking --disable-multilib \ --disable-libsanitizer --disable-lto. then bootstrap gcc, why do I see 1000s of failures with % cd gcc % gmake -j7 check-c ... FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr64365.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr61786.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr63380-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr65270-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) Should the testsuite recognize that gcc is built without LTO support? -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: testsuite requires LTO? 2022-04-11 23:51 testsuite requires LTO? Steve Kargl @ 2022-04-12 7:07 ` Richard Biener 2022-04-12 7:26 ` Richard Biener 2022-04-12 7:41 ` Andreas Schwab 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Richard Biener @ 2022-04-12 7:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve Kargl; +Cc: GCC Development On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:53 AM Steve Kargl via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > If I configure gcc with the following > > ../gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \ > --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking --disable-multilib \ > --disable-libsanitizer --disable-lto. > > then bootstrap gcc, why do I see 1000s of failures with > > % cd gcc > % gmake -j7 check-c > ... > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr64365.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr61786.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr63380-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr65270-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > Should the testsuite recognize that gcc is built without LTO support? Yes, it does, in testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp if [info exists TORTURE_OPTIONS] { set DG_TORTURE_OPTIONS $TORTURE_OPTIONS } else { # It is theoretically beneficial to group all of the O2/O3 options together, # as in many cases the compiler will generate identical executables for # all of them--and the c-torture testsuite will skip testing identical # executables multiple times. # Also note that -finline-functions is explicitly included in one of the # items below, even though -O3 is also specified, because some ports may # choose to disable inlining functions by default, even when optimizing. set DG_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ { -O0 } \ { -O1 } \ { -O2 } \ { -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions } \ { -O3 -g } \ { -Os } ] if [check_effective_target_lto] { # When having plugin test both slim and fat LTO and plugin/nonplugin # path. if [check_linker_plugin_available] { set LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ { -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none } \ { -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects } ] } else { set LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ { -O2 -flto -flto-partition=none } \ { -O2 -flto } ] } so either TORTURE_OPTIONS is set or check_effective_target_lto doesn't work. The check does simply return [check_no_compiler_messages lto object { void foo (void) { } } "-flto"] so I wonder what your excess errors are? The check above should also leave traces in the testsuite log. It might be that --disable-lto doesn't disable gcc -c -flto but just disables lto1 building though. > > -- > Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: testsuite requires LTO? 2022-04-12 7:07 ` Richard Biener @ 2022-04-12 7:26 ` Richard Biener 2022-04-12 17:30 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Richard Biener @ 2022-04-12 7:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve Kargl; +Cc: GCC Development On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 9:07 AM Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:53 AM Steve Kargl via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > If I configure gcc with the following > > > > ../gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \ > > --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking --disable-multilib \ > > --disable-libsanitizer --disable-lto. > > > > then bootstrap gcc, why do I see 1000s of failures with > > > > % cd gcc > > % gmake -j7 check-c > > ... > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr64365.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr61786.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr63380-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr65270-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > > > Should the testsuite recognize that gcc is built without LTO support? > > Yes, it does, in testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp > > if [info exists TORTURE_OPTIONS] { > set DG_TORTURE_OPTIONS $TORTURE_OPTIONS > } else { > # It is theoretically beneficial to group all of the O2/O3 options together, > # as in many cases the compiler will generate identical executables for > # all of them--and the c-torture testsuite will skip testing identical > # executables multiple times. > # Also note that -finline-functions is explicitly included in one of the > # items below, even though -O3 is also specified, because some ports may > # choose to disable inlining functions by default, even when optimizing. > set DG_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ > { -O0 } \ > { -O1 } \ > { -O2 } \ > { -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops > -ftracer -finline-functions } \ > { -O3 -g } \ > { -Os } ] > > if [check_effective_target_lto] { > # When having plugin test both slim and fat LTO and plugin/nonplugin > # path. > if [check_linker_plugin_available] { > set LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ > { -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none } \ > { -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects } > ] > } else { > set LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ > { -O2 -flto -flto-partition=none } \ > { -O2 -flto } > ] > } > > so either TORTURE_OPTIONS is set or check_effective_target_lto doesn't work. > The check does simply > > return [check_no_compiler_messages lto object { > void foo (void) { } > } "-flto"] > > so I wonder what your excess errors are? The check above should also > leave traces > in the testsuite log. It might be that --disable-lto doesn't disable > gcc -c -flto but just > disables lto1 building though. I checked and it works fine for me, --disable-lto disables LTO support and there's no extra FAILs in dg-torture.exp. The testsuite log has Executing on host: /tmp/obj/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/obj/gcc/ -fdiagnostics-plain-output -flto -c -o lto10207.o lto10207.c (timeout = 300) spawn -ignore SIGHUP /tmp/obj/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/obj/gcc/ -fdiagnostics-plain-output -flto -c -o lto10207.o lto10207.c^M cc1: error: LTO support has not been enabled in this configuration^M compiler exited with status 1 which causes no -flto to be used. Richard. > > > > > -- > > Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: testsuite requires LTO? 2022-04-12 7:26 ` Richard Biener @ 2022-04-12 17:30 ` Steve Kargl 2022-04-12 17:42 ` Jonathan Wakely 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2022-04-12 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Richard Biener; +Cc: GCC Development On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 09:26:58AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 9:07 AM Richard Biener > <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:53 AM Steve Kargl via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > > > If I configure gcc with the following > > > > > > ../gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \ > > > --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking --disable-multilib \ > > > --disable-libsanitizer --disable-lto. > > > > > > then bootstrap gcc, why do I see 1000s of failures with > > > > > > % cd gcc > > > % gmake -j7 check-c > > > ... > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr64365.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr61786.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr63380-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr65270-2.c -O2 -flto (test for excess errors) > > > > > > Should the testsuite recognize that gcc is built without LTO support? > > > > Yes, it does, in testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp > > > > if [info exists TORTURE_OPTIONS] { > > set DG_TORTURE_OPTIONS $TORTURE_OPTIONS > > } else { > > # It is theoretically beneficial to group all of the O2/O3 options together, > > # as in many cases the compiler will generate identical executables for > > # all of them--and the c-torture testsuite will skip testing identical > > # executables multiple times. > > # Also note that -finline-functions is explicitly included in one of the > > # items below, even though -O3 is also specified, because some ports may > > # choose to disable inlining functions by default, even when optimizing. > > set DG_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ > > { -O0 } \ > > { -O1 } \ > > { -O2 } \ > > { -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops > > -ftracer -finline-functions } \ > > { -O3 -g } \ > > { -Os } ] > > > > if [check_effective_target_lto] { > > # When having plugin test both slim and fat LTO and plugin/nonplugin > > # path. > > if [check_linker_plugin_available] { > > set LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ > > { -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none } \ > > { -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects } > > ] > > } else { > > set LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS [list \ > > { -O2 -flto -flto-partition=none } \ > > { -O2 -flto } > > ] > > } > > > > so either TORTURE_OPTIONS is set or check_effective_target_lto doesn't work. > > The check does simply > > > > return [check_no_compiler_messages lto object { > > void foo (void) { } > > } "-flto"] > > > > so I wonder what your excess errors are? The check above should also > > leave traces > > in the testsuite log. It might be that --disable-lto doesn't disable > > gcc -c -flto but just > > disables lto1 building though. > > I checked and it works fine for me, --disable-lto disables LTO support > and there's > no extra FAILs in dg-torture.exp. The testsuite log has > > Executing on host: /tmp/obj/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/obj/gcc/ > -fdiagnostics-plain-output -flto -c -o lto10207.o lto10207.c > (timeout = 300) > spawn -ignore SIGHUP /tmp/obj/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/obj/gcc/ > -fdiagnostics-plain-output -flto -c -o lto10207.o lto10207.c^M > cc1: error: LTO support has not been enabled in this configuration^M > compiler exited with status 1 > > which causes no -flto to be used. > Well, I determined what the problem is. On FreeBSD, GNU make is gmake. make(1) on FreeBSD is BSD make. % gmake -j7 check-c Does not pass down the name of the invoking command to sub-make jobs. 4000+ FAILs had the form make[2]: illegal argument to -j -- must be positive integer! FAIL ... Well, that's an error message from BSD make. If I do % setenv MAKE gmake % gmake -j7 check-c 4000+ FAILS disappear, so it's good that he environmental variable MAKE is honored. I know in the past I did not need to sete MAKE. With LTO disabled and MAKE set, I see === gcc Summary === # of expected passes 175408 # of unexpected failures 1078 # of unexpected successes 20 # of expected failures 1459 # of unresolved testcases 10 # of unsupported tests 3248 /usr/home/sgk/gcc/objx/gcc/xgcc version 12.0.1 20220411 (experimental) (GCC) -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: testsuite requires LTO? 2022-04-12 17:30 ` Steve Kargl @ 2022-04-12 17:42 ` Jonathan Wakely 2022-04-12 18:03 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Wakely @ 2022-04-12 17:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve Kargl; +Cc: Richard Biener, GCC Development On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 18:32, Steve Kargl wrote: > Well, I determined what the problem is. On FreeBSD, > GNU make is gmake. make(1) on FreeBSD is BSD make. > > % gmake -j7 check-c > > Does not pass down the name of the invoking command > to sub-make jobs. That suggests some makefile is using 'make' directly, not using $(MAKE). But if that was the case, then setting MAKE in the environment wouldn't help either. What version of gmake do you have? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: testsuite requires LTO? 2022-04-12 17:42 ` Jonathan Wakely @ 2022-04-12 18:03 ` Steve Kargl 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Steve Kargl @ 2022-04-12 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jonathan Wakely; +Cc: Richard Biener, GCC Development On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 06:42:20PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 18:32, Steve Kargl wrote: > > Well, I determined what the problem is. On FreeBSD, > > GNU make is gmake. make(1) on FreeBSD is BSD make. > > > > % gmake -j7 check-c > > > > Does not pass down the name of the invoking command > > to sub-make jobs. > > That suggests some makefile is using 'make' directly, not using > $(MAKE). But if that was the case, then setting MAKE in the > environment wouldn't help either. > > What version of gmake do you have? % gmake --version GNU Make 4.3 Built for amd64-portbld-freebsd13.0 It's the version from FreeBSD port collection. I just started a new bootstrap with LTO enabled without any patches in my gcc tree to try to get a baseline. It will take a bit. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: testsuite requires LTO? 2022-04-11 23:51 testsuite requires LTO? Steve Kargl 2022-04-12 7:07 ` Richard Biener @ 2022-04-12 7:41 ` Andreas Schwab 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Andreas Schwab @ 2022-04-12 7:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steve Kargl via Gcc; +Cc: sgk On Apr 11 2022, Steve Kargl via Gcc wrote: > Should the testsuite recognize that gcc is built without LTO support? Yes, we have check_effective_target_lto for that. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1 "And now for something completely different." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-04-12 18:03 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-04-11 23:51 testsuite requires LTO? Steve Kargl 2022-04-12 7:07 ` Richard Biener 2022-04-12 7:26 ` Richard Biener 2022-04-12 17:30 ` Steve Kargl 2022-04-12 17:42 ` Jonathan Wakely 2022-04-12 18:03 ` Steve Kargl 2022-04-12 7:41 ` Andreas Schwab
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).