On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:17 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Richard Guenther > <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 7:56 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Richard Guenther >>> <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 7:34 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> We have been running functional tests on SPEC CPU 2K/2006 >>>>> on Linux/ia32 and Linux/Intel64 at -O2 and -O3. We'd like to >>>>> report pass and regressions. We may send SPEC CPU >>>>> regressions to >>>>> >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/ >>>>> >>>>> But for passes, there is no suitable place to report. >>>>> >>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/ >>>>> >>>>> is for gcc testsuite. If I send SPEC CPU pass to it, it >>>>> may be buried by normal test results. >>>>> >>>>> Any suggestions. >>>> >>>> Put it on a website and link to it from >>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/benchmarks/ >>>> >>> >>> My website isn't visible to public. Also it isn't really benchmark since >>> I only run functional tests. My reports only show pass or which tests >>> failed. >> >> I see. I agree that gcc-regression is appropriate for FAILs then. Is it >> important to have PASSes available somewhere? (you can assume PASSes >> if there are no FAIL reports). >> > > But you won't know what exactly the last passing revision is and > you can't tell if my SPEC CPU machines are running normally. >
I changed my SPEC CPU machines to send SPEC CPU regressions to gcc-regression. The report may look like --- Subject: gcc (GCC) 4.3.3 20090117 (prerelease) [gcc-4_3-branch revision 143474] failed SPEC CPU 2006 on i686 Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 09:22:44 -0800 (PST) From: h...@gnu-27.sc.intel.com (H.J. Lu (Intel64)) With runspec -c lnx-i686-gcc.cfg -n 1 -l -o asc -I all -T base -e o2 Error: 1x464.h264ref --- I'd like to send my SPEC CPU success to a gcc mailing list. I am not sure if SPEC SPU success is appropriate for gcc-regression. A new mailing list, like, gcc-results or gcc-success, is useful for my purpose. People can also use it to report gcc success for other important packages, like Linux kernel or glibc. Thanks. -- H.J.
