Re: regression test issue
Hi, On 02/05/2014 06:29 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Hello Everyone, The following two Cilk Plus tests is timing out at -O1 in my x86_64 box (-O2, -O3 and -O0 works fine). These tests were working fine till revision r207047. Can someone please look at this? It looks like a middle-end/back-end issue. WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc -O1 -fcilkplus execution test WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c -O1 execution test Thanks. I'm wondering if we could open an high priority Bugzilla about that and for the time being avoid running the test at -O1, it is slowing down the testsuite and using a lot of cpu. Also, maybe you could figure out which specific change caused the regression and ping the appropriate people... Thanks again, Paolo.
RE: regression test issue
-Original Message-
From: Paolo Carlini [mailto:paolo.carl...@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 11:53 AM
To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: regression test issue
Hi,
On 02/05/2014 06:29 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hello Everyone,
The following two Cilk Plus tests is timing out at -O1 in my x86_64 box
(-O2, -O3 and -O0 works fine). These tests were working fine till revision
r207047. Can someone please look at this? It looks like a middle-end/back-
end issue.
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc -O1 -fcilkplus execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c -O1 execution test
Thanks. I'm wondering if we could open an high priority Bugzilla about that
and for the time being avoid running the test at -O1, it is slowing down the
testsuite and using a lot of cpu. Also, maybe you could figure out which
specific change caused the regression and ping the appropriate people...
Hi Paolo,
OK. Here is a patch that will do so:
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp
===
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp(revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp(working copy)
@@ -64,12 +64,12 @@
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/AN/*.cc]] -O3
-ftree-vectorize -fcilkplus -g
if { [check_libcilkrts_available] } {
-dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-O1 -fcilkplus
+#dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-O1 -fcilkplus
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-O3 -fcilkplus
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-g -fcilkplus
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-g -O2 -fcilkplus
-dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain
$srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/*.c]] -O1
+#dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain
$srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/*.c]] -O1
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain
$srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/*.c]] -O3
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain
$srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/*.c]] -g
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain
$srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/*.c]] -g -O2
===
Here is the ChangeLog entry:
2014-02-05 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
* g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp: Commented out -O1 Cilk Keywords
test for the time-being.
Note: I am purposely commenting the line out and not deleting them because I
want to get them to run in -O1 some time, and deleting them might cause us
(atleast me :-). ) to forget about it.
I will go ahead and file a bugzilla report.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
Thanks again,
Paolo.
RE: regression test issue
Sorry, I forgot to put [PATCH] in the subject line. Is the patch below OK to
install?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
-Original Message-
From: Iyer, Balaji V
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 12:02 PM
To: 'Paolo Carlini'; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: RE: regression test issue
-Original Message-
From: Paolo Carlini [mailto:paolo.carl...@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 11:53 AM
To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: regression test issue
Hi,
On 02/05/2014 06:29 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hello Everyone,
The following two Cilk Plus tests is timing out at -O1 in my x86_64
box
(-O2, -O3 and -O0 works fine). These tests were working fine till
revision r207047. Can someone please look at this? It looks like a
middle-end/back- end issue.
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc -O1 -fcilkplus execution
test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c -O1 execution test
Thanks. I'm wondering if we could open an high priority Bugzilla about
that and for the time being avoid running the test at -O1, it is
slowing down the testsuite and using a lot of cpu. Also, maybe you
could figure out which specific change caused the regression and ping the
appropriate people...
Hi Paolo,
OK. Here is a patch that will do so:
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp
==
=
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp(revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp(working copy)
@@ -64,12 +64,12 @@
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/AN/*.cc]] -O3
-
ftree-vectorize -fcilkplus -g
if { [check_libcilkrts_available] } {
-dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-
O1 -fcilkplus
+#dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-
O1 -fcilkplus
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-O3
-fcilkplus
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-g -
fcilkplus
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/*.cc]]
-g -
O2 -fcilkplus
-dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-
plus/CK/*.c]] -O1
+#dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-
plus/CK/*.c]] -O1
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-
plus/CK/*.c]] -O3
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-
plus/CK/*.c]] -g
dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/c-c++-common/cilk-
plus/CK/*.c]] -g -O2
==
=
Here is the ChangeLog entry:
2014-02-05 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
* g++.dg/cilk-plus/cilk-plus.exp: Commented out -O1 Cilk Keywords
test for the time-being.
Note: I am purposely commenting the line out and not deleting them
because I want to get them to run in -O1 some time, and deleting them
might cause us (atleast me :-). ) to forget about it.
I will go ahead and file a bugzilla report.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
Thanks again,
Paolo.
Re: regression test issue
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 07:08:32PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: Sorry, I forgot to put [PATCH] in the subject line. Is the patch below OK to install? No. If you want to skip a particular test, you should use dg-skip-if for that, see http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Directives.html Jakub
RE: regression test issue
-Original Message-
From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 2:25 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Paolo Carlini; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: regression test issue
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 07:08:32PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Sorry, I forgot to put [PATCH] in the subject line. Is the patch below OK to
install?
No. If you want to skip a particular test, you should use dg-skip-if for
that,
see http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Directives.html
Ok. Here is the fixed patch:
Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
===
--- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2014-02-05 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
+
+ * g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc: Disable test for -O1
+ * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c: Likewise.
+
2014-02-03 Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr
PR c++/53017
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc
===
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-do run { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* arm*-*-* } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* arm*-*-*
} } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
#include assert.h
#include unistd.h
Index: gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(revision
207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-do run { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-additional-options -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
OK to install?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
Jakub
Re: regression test issue
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 07:38:11PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
+2014-02-05 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
+
+ * g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc: Disable test for -O1
+ * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c: Likewise.
Ok.
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-do run { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* arm*-*-* } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*
arm*-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
#include assert.h
#include unistd.h
Index: gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(revision
207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-do run { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-additional-options -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } }
*/
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
OK to install?
Jakub
RE: regression test issue
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jakub Jelinek
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 2:43 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Paolo Carlini; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: regression test issue
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 07:38:11PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
+2014-02-05 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
+
+ * g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc: Disable test for -O1
+ * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c: Likewise.
Ok.
Committed.
-Balaji V. Iyer.
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-do run { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* arm*-*-* } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*
arm*-*-* }
} } */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
#include assert.h
#include unistd.h
Index: gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c
==
=
--- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(revision
207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(working
copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-do run { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-additional-options -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } }
} */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
OK to install?
Jakub
Re: regression test issue
Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com writes:
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc
===
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-do run { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* arm*-*-* } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*
arm*-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
#include assert.h
#include unistd.h
Index: gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(revision
207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-do run { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-additional-options -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } }
*/
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
You should put a comment (e.g. a PR reference) in the comment field to
explain why you're skipping this test. Most likely, the last arg to
dg-skip-if ({ }) is optional; if so, please omit it.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
RE: regression test issue
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Rainer Orth
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 4:22 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Jakub Jelinek; Paolo Carlini; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: regression test issue
Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com writes:
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc
==
=
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (revision 207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cilk-plus/CK/catch_exc.cc (working copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-do run { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* arm*-*-* } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*
arm*-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
#include assert.h
#include unistd.h
Index: gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c
==
=
--- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(revision
207437)
+++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/cilk-plus/CK/spawner_inline.c(working
copy)
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
/* { dg-do run { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-options -fcilkplus } */
/* { dg-additional-options -lcilkrts { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-*
} } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if { *-*-* } { -O1 } { } } */
You should put a comment (e.g. a PR reference) in the comment field to
explain why you're skipping this test. Most likely, the last arg to
dg-skip-if ({
}) is optional; if so, please omit it.
There isn't a PR reference for this. I can add a comment in the testcase. Would
that be enough?
I will also remove the last {} from the tests.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: regression test issue
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 09:48:12PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
You should put a comment (e.g. a PR reference) in the comment field to
explain why you're skipping this test. Most likely, the last arg to
dg-skip-if ({
}) is optional; if so, please omit it.
There isn't a PR reference for this. I can add a comment in the testcase.
Would that be enough?
I will also remove the last {} from the tests.
Please keep it as is, I have an untested fix for the issue already and will
be testing it soon, so I'd prefer not to have to back out too many changes.
Jakub
