On 12/12/06, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Smoke tests look rather unstable today on SUSE 9 x86_64. They pass and fail alternately.
This failure also reproduced with different classlib test. Due to this issue the CC is always failed on run of classlib tests over the DRLVM. Thanks, Vladimir I observed a number of failures (io.Integers, jni.LoadLibrary, gc.List,
gc.Free) with the same error message: Assertion failed: 0 LIL INTERNAL ERROR: Not enough temporary registers java: /nfs/ins/proj/drl/coreapi/esemukhi/em64/drlvm/trunk/vm/port/src/lil/em64t/pim/lil_code_generator_em64t.cpp:204: LcgEM64TCodeGen::Tmp_GR_Opnd::Tmp_GR_Opnd(LcgEM64TContext&, LilInstructionContext*): Assertion `0' failed. log4cxx: No appender could be found for logger (port.old). log4cxx: Please initialize the log4cxx system properly. Elena geir > > > > > > > Elena > > > > geir > >> > >> > >> Elena Semukhina wrote: > >> > After a few days of runs I can conclude that almost 40 tests are > valid > >> and > >> > should be removed from the exclude lists. I've prepared a patch to > >> smoke > >> > tests: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2543 > >> > > >> > After it is applied we'll have 3 stable issues: > >> > 1) gc.Mark craches on Windows > >> > 2) - 3) stress.Stack and io.Integers will pass only on linux/JIT and > >> fail > >> > on other configurations because of StackOverflowError. Is it a known > >> issue? > >> > > >> > We'll also have four tests failing intermittently. I plan to play > with > >> them > >> > to get more details. > >> > > >> > All the above tests remain excluded. > >> > > >> > I prepared the update for ia32 platforms only because I don't have > >> > access to > >> > x86_64 machines for now. Hope to get it soon. > >> > > >> > I updated the http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/DRLVMInternalTestswith > >> new > >> > details. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Elena > >> > > >> > > >> > On 12/7/06, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 12/7/06, Alexey Varlamov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > 2006/12/6, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> >> > > On 12/5/06, Rana Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > How much total additional time would be needed to run the > tests > >> >> that > >> >> > are > >> >> > > > excluded for "slowness" only? > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > There are 11 tests marked as slow. They run about 30 sec in JIT > >> mode. > >> >> > Only > >> >> > > one of them is rather slow: gc.Mark (~15 sec). > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I compared the whole run duration on linux (JIT + interpreter). > >> >> > Currently 26 > >> >> > > tests run for about 3 min 30 sec. Adding 42 tests from exclude > >> list > >> >> > > increases duration up to 11 minutes (1 min 40 sec for JIT). > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Is this time acceptable? > >> >> > > >> >> > Probably yes.Exact timings depend on hardware used; I guess the > >> >> > figures above are on a laptop? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> No, 11 minutes are for multiprocessor machines (Windows/linux). On a > >> >> single processor desktop the tests run for 24 minutes :( Most > >> >> annoying is > >> >> the interpreter mode. We can agree later that some slow tests > >> should be > >> >> excluded for interpreter. > >> >> > >> >> Anyway I need a couple of days to run the tests intensively to > reveal > >> all > >> >> unstable issues. > >> >> > >> >> Elena > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Anyway let's try them over! Later if someone analyzed coverage, we > can > >> >> > re-balance pre-commit and CI tests. > >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Thanks, > >> >> > > Elena > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Thanks, > >> >> > > > Rana > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On 12/5/06, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > We currently have more than 40 smoke tests in the exclude > >> list. > >> >> > > > > I tried to run all of them on linux/Windows and found out > that > >> >> > most of > >> >> > > > > them > >> >> > > > > stably pass. > >> >> > > > > Those of them which have been marked with the "slow" keyword > >> >> don't > >> >> > > > > actually > >> >> > > > > run slow. They are not slower than an average smoke test. > Only > >> >> few > >> >> > of > >> >> > > > them > >> >> > > > > work about 10 seconds (comparing to 1-4 seconds duration of > >> any > >> >> > other > >> >> > > > > test). > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Only 3 tests stably fail and about 5 tests fail > >> intermittently. > >> >> > I've > >> >> > > > added > >> >> > > > > the details to the > >> >> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/DRLVMInternalTestspage. > >> >> > > > > I plan to file JIRA issues about failing tests and to gather > >> more > >> >> > > > > statictics > >> >> > > > > on intermittent failures. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Does anybody object to removing most tests from exclude > lists > >> and > >> >> > bring > >> >> > > > > them > >> >> > > > > back to runs? > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > -- > >> >> > > > > Thanks, > >> >> > > > > Elena > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > -- > >> >> > > Thanks, > >> >> > > Elena > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Thanks, > >> >> Elena > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > -- Thanks, Elena
