thr3ads.net - llvm dev - [LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8 [Dec 2011]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

David Fang

2011-Dec-16 06:51 UTC

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

Hi,
 	Thanks for the quick reply again.
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at csl.cornell.edu>
wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8
(g++-4.0.1), and
>> have the following test results to share.
>> Summary below, full log at:
>>
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/r146586-powerpc-darwin8-results.txt
>>
>> The only edits required were those I posted to llvm-commits yesterday
(re:
>> "some missing clang libs").  And I also edited LitConfig.py
to point to
>> /sw/bin/bash (4.2) because /bin/bash is missing support for pipefail.
>>
>> Some of the tests hung indefinitely on 'lli', so I had to kill
them.
>>
>> My question is: which of the following test failures should be
addressed first
>> as top priority?  Are there any low-hanging fruit that look easy to fix
>> (looking at the full log)?
>
> All the tests that say "No available targets" are incorrectly
> configured; they assume the x86 backend is available.  They can be
> "fixed" easily, but that won't really get you closer to a
usable
> compiler.
I think these can be ignored for the time being...
> I would guess that all the PCH tests are crashing for the same reason,
> so fixing that could fix a lot of failures at once on the clang side.
> If you're interested in actually having a usable compiler for your
> system, I would say the crashes in CodeGen/Generic and CodeGen/PowerPC
> are the highest priority.
Indeed I am interested.  :)

Here's another interesting data point.
My full build/test log of release-3.0, bootstrapping with 
powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1 is here:
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/llvm-clang-release-3.0-powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1-fink-build-log.txt
(append .bz2 to URL for compressed version)
fink info file (for darwin8 only): 
http://fink.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/fink/experimental/fangism/finkinfo/llvm30.info?view=log
at revision 1.9.  (also patch file needed from the same dir.)

These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also 
comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here: 
http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363
(Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46
bootstrap.)
This consistency between different bootstraps of the release gives me some 
hope that g++-4.0.1 is yet usable.

I don't know how far diverged trunk is from the 3.0-branch, but there are 
far fewer CodeGen test failures than with svn-trunk.  Both trunk and 
branch exhibit numerous PCH failures.  Does this suggest some code-gen 
regression on the trunk that others could hunt for?

In the full bootstrap log, I see numerous compiler warnings.  Could any of 
them be related to potential PCH errors?  For example, I see:
tools/clang/include/clang/Serialization/ASTBitCodes.h:100: warning: passing
negative
value '-0x00000000000000001' for argument 1 to
'clang::serialization::TypeIdx::TypeIdx(uint32_t)'
Is the Serialization code involved PCH reading/writing?

Thanks for entertaining my questions.  I know I'm just getting my feet wet 
with llvm/clang.

Fang
(I'm fangism in IRC.)

-- 
David Fang
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/

David Fang

2011-Dec-16 08:05 UTC

head link

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

>>  I would guess that all the PCH tests are crashing for the same reason,
>>  so fixing that could fix a lot of failures at once on the clang side.
>
>>  If you're interested in actually having a usable compiler for your
>>  system, I would say the crashes in CodeGen/Generic and CodeGen/PowerPC
>>  are the highest priority.
>
> Indeed I am interested.  :)
>
> Here's another interesting data point.
> My full build/test log of release-3.0, bootstrapping with 
> powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1 is here:
>
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/llvm-clang-release-3.0-powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1-fink-build-log.txt
> (append .bz2 to URL for compressed version)
> fink info file (for darwin8 only): 
>
http://fink.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/fink/experimental/fangism/finkinfo/llvm30.info?view=log
> at revision 1.9.  (also patch file needed from the same dir.)
>
> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also
comparable
> to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here: 
> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363
> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46 
> bootstrap.)
> This consistency between different bootstraps of the release gives me some 
> hope that g++-4.0.1 is yet usable.
Hi,
 	Here's a single run of one failing PCH test.
In clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp, I've added a print stmt:
Decl *ASTReader::GetDecl(DeclID ID) {
...
   unsigned Index = ID - NUM_PREDEF_DECL_IDS;

   if (Index > DeclsLoaded.size()) {
     std::fprintf(stderr, "Index = %u\n", Index);
     Error("declaration ID out-of-range for AST file");
     return 0;
   }
...
}

recompiled, re-ran one test:


[fangism:fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build] fang% bin/llvm-lit -v 
../llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp
llvm-lit: lit.cfg:146: note: using clang: 
'/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/bin/./clang'
-- Testing: 1 tests, 2 threads --
FAIL: Clang :: CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp (1 of 1)
******************** TEST 'Clang :: 
CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp' FAILED 
********************
Script:
--
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/bin/./clang -cc1 
-internal-isystem 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/bin/../lib/clang/3.0/include
-fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -triple x86_64-apple-darwin10 -S -emit-llvm 
-std=c++11 -include 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/ser.h
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp
-o - | FileCheck 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/bin/./clang -cc1 
-internal-isystem 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/bin/../lib/clang/3.0/include
-fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -triple x86_64-apple-darwin10 -emit-pch -o 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/Output/cg.cpp.tmp-ser.pch
-std=c++11 -x c++ 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/ser.h
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/bin/./clang -cc1 
-internal-isystem 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/bin/../lib/clang/3.0/include
-fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -triple x86_64-apple-darwin10 -S -emit-llvm 
-std=c++11 -include-pch 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/build/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/Output/cg.cpp.tmp-ser.pch
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp
-o - | FileCheck 
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp
--
Exit Code: 1
Command Output (stderr):
--
/Volumes/Mercedes2/sw/src/fink.build/llvm30-3.0-0.1/llvm-3.0.src/tools/clang/test/CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp:23:8:
warning: expression result unused
   D(), noexcept(E());
        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
1 warning generated.
Index = 184549368
fatal error: malformed or corrupted PCH file: 'declaration ID out-of-range 
for AST file'
Index = 201326584
1 error generated.
FileCheck error: '-' is empty.
--

********************
Testing Time: 5.22s
********************
Failing Tests (1):
     Clang :: CXX/expr/expr.unary/expr.unary.noexcept/cg.cpp

   Unexpected Failures: 1


According to the printed "Index = ...", 
GetDecl returns twice with what looks like some garbage integers.
Any possible explanation or hints on where to look from here?

Fang


-- 
David Fang
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/

Jack Howarth

2011-Dec-16 14:20 UTC

head link

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 01:51:57AM -0500, David Fang
wrote:> Hi,
> 	Thanks for the quick reply again.
>
>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Fang <fang at
csl.cornell.edu> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've bootstrapped llvm/clang from svn-trunk on powerpc-darwin8
(g++-4.0.1), and
>>> have the following test results to share.
>>> Summary below, full log at:
>>>
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/r146586-powerpc-darwin8-results.txt
>>>
>>> The only edits required were those I posted to llvm-commits
yesterday (re:
>>> "some missing clang libs").  And I also edited
LitConfig.py to point to
>>> /sw/bin/bash (4.2) because /bin/bash is missing support for
pipefail.
>>>
>>> Some of the tests hung indefinitely on 'lli', so I had to
kill them.
>>>
>>> My question is: which of the following test failures should be
addressed first
>>> as top priority?  Are there any low-hanging fruit that look easy to
fix
>>> (looking at the full log)?
>>
>> All the tests that say "No available targets" are incorrectly
>> configured; they assume the x86 backend is available.  They can be
>> "fixed" easily, but that won't really get you closer to a
usable
>> compiler.
>
> I think these can be ignored for the time being...
>
>> I would guess that all the PCH tests are crashing for the same reason,
>> so fixing that could fix a lot of failures at once on the clang side.
>
>> If you're interested in actually having a usable compiler for your
>> system, I would say the crashes in CodeGen/Generic and CodeGen/PowerPC
>> are the highest priority.
>
> Indeed I am interested.  :)
>
> Here's another interesting data point.
> My full build/test log of release-3.0, bootstrapping with  
> powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1 is here:
>
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/sw/llvm/llvm-clang-release-3.0-powerpc-darwin8-g++-4.0.1-fink-build-log.txt
> (append .bz2 to URL for compressed version)
> fink info file (for darwin8 only):  
>
http://fink.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/fink/experimental/fangism/finkinfo/llvm30.info?view=log
> at revision 1.9.  (also patch file needed from the same dir.)
>
> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also  
> comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here:  
> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363
> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46
bootstrap.)
> This consistency between different bootstraps of the release gives me 
> some hope that g++-4.0.1 is yet usable.
David,
   Another alternative for darwin8 would be to bootstrap llvm/clang 3.0 using
the clang from the fink llvm29 package (since clang 2.9 should build fine
against
gcc-4.0.1).
            Jack
>
> I don't know how far diverged trunk is from the 3.0-branch, but there
are
> far fewer CodeGen test failures than with svn-trunk.  Both trunk and  
> branch exhibit numerous PCH failures.  Does this suggest some code-gen  
> regression on the trunk that others could hunt for?
>
> In the full bootstrap log, I see numerous compiler warnings.  Could any 
> of them be related to potential PCH errors?  For example, I see:
> tools/clang/include/clang/Serialization/ASTBitCodes.h:100: warning: 
> passing negative value '-0x00000000000000001' for argument 1 to 
> 'clang::serialization::TypeIdx::TypeIdx(uint32_t)'
> Is the Serialization code involved PCH reading/writing?
>
> Thanks for entertaining my questions.  I know I'm just getting my feet 
> wet with llvm/clang.
>
> Fang
> (I'm fangism in IRC.)
>
> -- 
> David Fang
> http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

David Fang

2011-Dec-16 17:17 UTC

head link

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

>> These results have far fewer failures than svn-trunk, and are also
>> comparable to bootstrapping with gcc-4.6.2, summarized here:
>> http://paste.lisp.org/display/126363
>> (Unfortunately, I no longer have the whole build/test log for the gcc46
bootstrap.)
>> This consistency between different bootstraps of the release gives me
>> some hope that g++-4.0.1 is yet usable.
>
> David,
>   Another alternative for darwin8 would be to bootstrap llvm/clang 3.0
using
> the clang from the fink llvm29 package (since clang 2.9 should build fine
against
> gcc-4.0.1).
>            Jack
Hi Jack,
 	I never managed to successfully build llvm29 on powerpc-darwin8, 
after running into some build issues, and having filed bug 9958, I got the 
impression of ppc-darwin being "not supported", so I didn't put
much more
effort into it back then.  However llvm28 did build, and I still have 
it installed and hidden away.  (It looks like *someone* runs ppc-darwin 
a buildbot, but not for darwin8.)  Knowing what I've learned so far, the 
effort would be similar, perhaps even duplicate to just trying to fix 
things directly with g++-4.0.1.  Time will tell, I suppose.

Fang


-- 
David Fang
http://www.csl.cornell.edu/~fang/

Seemingly Similar Threads

Search for more maybe matching threads

llvm dev - Dec 2011 - [LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

[LLVMdev] llvm/clang test failures on powerpc-darwin8

Seemingly Similar Threads