llvm dev - May 2017 - Build polly-amd64-linux Failure

On Sat, May 6, 2017, at 04:28 PM, llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org
wrote:
> The Buildbot has detected a failed build on builder polly-amd64-linux
> while building polly.
> Full details are available at:
>  http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/polly-amd64-linux/builds/6539
> 
> Buildbot URL: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/
> 
> Buildslave for this Build: grosser1
> 
> Build Reason: scheduler
> Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] 302339
> Blamelist: meinersbur
Hi Michael,

the recent commit caused a failure:

/home/grosser/buildslave/polly-amd64-linux/llvm.src/tools/polly/test/DeLICM/reduction_overapproximate.ll:102:16:
error: expected string not found in input
; APPROX-NEXT: new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] : i0 <3
and 0 <= i1 <= -2 + i0 };
               ^
<stdin>:62:2: note: scanning from here
 new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] : 2 <= i0 <= 3 and 0
 <= i1 <= -2 + i0 };

I have no idea where it comes from. On my machine (and my earlier tests)
show no issues. Any ideas?

Best,
Tobias


> 
> BUILD FAILED: failed test_polly
> 
> sincerely,
>  -The Buildbot
> 
> 
>
===============================================================================>
> CHANGES:
> Files:
>  include/polly/ScopInfo.h
>  lib/Analysis/ScopInfo.cpp
>  lib/Support/GICHelper.cpp
>  lib/Transform/DeLICM.cpp
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_constant_selfconflict.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate_gvnpre.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate_hoisted.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate_licm.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate_load.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate_readonly.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate_synthesizable.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_looprotate_undef.ll
>  test/DeLICM/reduction_overapproximate.ll
> On: http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project
> For: polly
> At: Sat 06 May 2017 07:21:54
> Changed By: meinersbur
> Comments: [DeLICM] Known knowledge.
> 
> Extend the Knowledge class to store information about the contents
> of array elements and which values are written. Two knowledges do
> not conflict the known content is the same. The content information
> if computed from writes to and loads from the array elements, and
> represented by "ValInst": isl spaces that compare equal if the
value
> represented is the same.
> 
> Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D31247Properties: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOGS:
> Last 15 lines of 'stdio':
> 	Failing Tests (1):
> 	    Polly :: DeLICM/reduction_overapproximate.ll
> 	
> 	  Expected Passes    : 807
> 	  Expected Failures  : 11
> 	  Unsupported Tests  : 54
> 	  Unexpected Failures: 1
> 	tools/polly/test/CMakeFiles/check-polly-tests.dir/build.make:57: recipe
for target 'tools/polly/test/CMakeFiles/check-polly-tests' failed
> 	make[3]: *** [tools/polly/test/CMakeFiles/check-polly-tests] Error 1
> 	CMakeFiles/Makefile2:14510: recipe for target
'tools/polly/test/CMakeFiles/check-polly-tests.dir/all' failed
> 	make[2]: *** [tools/polly/test/CMakeFiles/check-polly-tests.dir/all] Error
2
> 	CMakeFiles/Makefile2:14447: recipe for target
'tools/polly/test/CMakeFiles/check-polly.dir/rule' failed
> 	make[1]: *** [tools/polly/test/CMakeFiles/check-polly.dir/rule] Error 2
> 	Makefile:4188: recipe for target 'check-polly' failed
> 	make: *** [check-polly] Error 2
> 
> 
>

2017-05-06 16:46 GMT+02:00 Tobias Grosser <tobias at
grosser.es>:
> On Sat, May 6, 2017, at 04:28 PM, llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org wrote:
>> The Buildbot has detected a failed build on builder polly-amd64-linux
>> while building polly.
>> Full details are available at:
>>  http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/polly-amd64-linux/builds/6539
>>
>> Buildbot URL: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/
>>
>> Buildslave for this Build: grosser1
>>
>> Build Reason: scheduler
>> Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] 302339
>> Blamelist: meinersbur
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> the recent commit caused a failure:
>
>
/home/grosser/buildslave/polly-amd64-linux/llvm.src/tools/polly/test/DeLICM/reduction_overapproximate.ll:102:16:
> error: expected string not found in input
> ; APPROX-NEXT: new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] : i0
<> 3 and 0 <= i1 <= -2 + i0 };
>                ^
> <stdin>:62:2: note: scanning from here
>  new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] : 2 <= i0 <= 3
and 0
>  <= i1 <= -2 + i0 };
>
> I have no idea where it comes from. On my machine (and my earlier tests)
> show no issues. Any ideas?
No idea either. It worked reliably on the machines I tested with. I am
not even sure how to debug this difference.

Michael

-- 
Tardyzentrismus verboten!

On Tue, May 9, 2017, at 05:08 PM, Michael Kruse via llvm-dev
wrote:
> 2017-05-06 16:46 GMT+02:00 Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es>:
> > On Sat, May 6, 2017, at 04:28 PM, llvm.buildmaster at lab.llvm.org
wrote:
> >> The Buildbot has detected a failed build on builder
polly-amd64-linux
> >> while building polly.
> >> Full details are available at:
> >>  http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/polly-amd64-linux/builds/6539
> >>
> >> Buildbot URL: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/
> >>
> >> Buildslave for this Build: grosser1
> >>
> >> Build Reason: scheduler
> >> Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] 302339
> >> Blamelist: meinersbur
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > the recent commit caused a failure:
> >
> >
/home/grosser/buildslave/polly-amd64-linux/llvm.src/tools/polly/test/DeLICM/reduction_overapproximate.ll:102:16:
> > error: expected string not found in input
> > ; APPROX-NEXT: new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] :
i0 <> > 3 and 0 <= i1 <= -2 + i0 };
> >                ^
> > <stdin>:62:2: note: scanning from here
> >  new: { Stmt_reduction_inc[i0, i1] -> MemRef_A[2] : 2 <= i0
<= 3 and 0
> >  <= i1 <= -2 + i0 };
> >
> > I have no idea where it comes from. On my machine (and my earlier
tests)
> > show no issues. Any ideas?
> 
> No idea either. It worked reliably on the machines I tested with. I am
> not even sure how to debug this difference.
The sets we obtain are semantically identical, but have a different
representation. So it does not seem to be a correctness issue. Still, it
would be good if we can resolve this at some point.

Maybe open a bug report for now that we don't forget.

My first shot would be to compile a Release - no asserts of Polly and
see if the same results are obtained. My guess is that some of your
ASSERT statements cause isl to simplify constraints on the way, which
may not happen in a release build. If this is indeed the case, I do not
have a good answer how to address this.

Best,
Tobias