From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15382 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 2013 16:09:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 15373 invoked by uid 89); 6 Sep 2013 16:09:45 -0000 Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 16:09:45 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_FAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1VHybM-0005Kj-Qm from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 09:09:40 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 6 Sep 2013 09:09:41 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 17:09:39 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VHybJ-0002Of-U3; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 16:09:38 +0000 Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 16:09:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Steve Ellcey CC: Subject: Re: [patch, mips] Improved memset for MIPS In-Reply-To: <1378483039.5770.302.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> Message-ID: References: <93a232b5-9d0b-4a27-bbb5-16e3ae7c4b89@BAMAIL02.ba.imgtec.org> <1378483039.5770.302.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 On Fri, 6 Sep 2013, Steve Ellcey wrote: > On Fri, 2013-09-06 at 14:30 +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Sep 2013, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > > > > Tested with the glibc and gcc testsuites and by doing some standalone > > > performance measurements. > > > > Has the glibc testsuite been run without regressions for all six > > combinations of (o32, n32, n64) with (big-endian, little-endian)? > > No. I did most of my testing outside of the glibc testsuite because I > find the glibc testsuite difficult to run, see > https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-help/2013-08/msg00040.html for some of my > problems/questions. I don't believe I have ever managed to do a clean You'll need to debug the problems as they indicate something wrong with your build environment. It's always advised to configure glibc with --prefix=/usr rather than some other prefix (but there is no requirement that the dynamic linker actually be installed during testing, you can ignore the -dynamic-linker= path), and your other error indicates some inconsistency regarding NO_CTORS_DTORS_SECTIONS. If you see more failures than are described at , you should investigate them as well. The expectation is that the glibc testsuite is the normal way to test patches before submission, and string function patches like this need it to be run for all six relevant ABI variants. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com