search for: mmap_stress

...is that? > We have seen this and similar tests be flaky on older Linux kernels due > to kernel bug(s). > May I ask you to run the same test (just built with clang) on the same > machine for ~100000 times and see if it ever crashes? > > clang++ ~/llvm/projects/compiler-rt/test/tsan/mmap_stress.cc -lpthread > while true; do for((i=0;i<10;i++)); do ./a.out || echo > ===============FAILED================ & done ; wait; done Add Michael again (who might have access to this Machine). Tobias

...2016, at 3:23 PM, Chris Matthews <chris.matthews at apple.com> wrote: > > I’m running this on green-dragon-03 which is running OSX 10.10.5. > > /Users/buildslave/jenkins/sharedspace/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_workspace\@2/clang-build/bin/clang++ ../llvm/projects/compiler-rt/test/tsan/mmap_stress.cc -lpthread > while true; do for((i=0;i<10;i++)); do ./a.out || echo ===============FAILED================ & done ; wait; done > > Seems like it is getting about 225 runs a minute, so it will take about 8 hours to complete 100k runs. > >> On Jan 12, 2016, at 1:28 PM, To...

On 02/02/2016 06:25 PM, Kuba Brecka via llvm-dev wrote: > Done in r259529. I unfortunately just got another failure, so this is clearly not darwin only or even low-noise on none-darwin platforms: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_check/9965/ I very much appreciate that people are investigating this issue, but it would be really nice to meanwhile disable this test

...ge the test to keep its output? Will it just be blank anyways? > On Jan 20, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > The test fails again: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_check/9739/testReport/junit/ThreadSanitizer/ThreadSanitizer/mmap_stress_cc/ <http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_check/9739/testReport/junit/ThreadSanitizer/ThreadSanitizer/mmap_stress_cc/> > But unfortunately lit does not provide the original log, so we still don't know why... > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Chris Matthew...

...w thousand times? I continue to suspect a kernel bug. > > On Jan 20, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > The test fails again: > http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_check/9739/testReport/junit/ThreadSanitizer/ThreadSanitizer/mmap_stress_cc/ > But unfortunately lit does not provide the original log, so we still don't > know why... > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Chris Matthews <chris.matthews at apple.com> > wrote: > >> These ran to completion without error. :( >> >> On Jan 12, 201...

On 01/22/2016 09:47 PM, Nico Weber via llvm-dev wrote: > Here's another one: > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-multistage/builds/60 I just got another error. Could we possibly disable this test until this issue has been resolved? Best, Tobias

Ah ha! I found crash reports: green-dragon-03:DiagnosticReports buildslave$ cat mmap_stress.cc.tmp_2016-01-19-231335_green-dragon-03.crash Process: mmap_stress.cc.tmp [95010] Path: /Users/USER/*/mmap_stress.cc.tmp Identifier: mmap_stress.cc.tmp Version: 0 Code Type: X86-64 (Native) Parent Process: bash [95004] Use...

Hi, one of the greendragon bots is flaky due to mmap_stress.cc in compiler-rt. In the last two days this bot failed three times (and recovered) due to thhe mmap_stress.cc test in compiler-rt: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_check/9557/testReport/ http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_check/9551/testReport/ http...

...t; wrote: > > +kuba, who ported tsan to OSX. > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Chris Matthews <chris.matthews at apple.com <mailto:chris.matthews at apple.com>> wrote: > Ah ha! I found crash reports: > > > green-dragon-03:DiagnosticReports buildslave$ cat mmap_stress.cc.tmp_2016-01-19-231335_green-dragon-03.crash > Process: mmap_stress.cc.tmp [95010] > Path: /Users/USER/*/mmap_stress.cc.tmp > Identifier: mmap_stress.cc.tmp > Version: 0 > Code Type: X86-64 (Native) > Parent Pr...

http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-multistage/builds/60 probably didn't use OS X? On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 11:20 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Can we XFAIL it only on OSX/Darwin & file a bug? It sounds like the issue > may be restricted to that platform & there's incomplete (possibly ongoing) > investigation? That way we

...// is_atomic : 1 > // is_read : 1 > // size_log : 2 > // addr0 : 3 > // epoch : kClkBits +Nico pointed to another failure: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/job/clang-stage1-cmake-RA_check/9782/testReport/ThreadSanitizer/ThreadSanitizer/mmap_stress_cc/

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 5:24 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Nico Weber <thakis at google.com> wrote: >> >> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-ppc64be-linux-multistage/builds/60 >> probably didn't use OS X? > > > Fair point - Kostya/Dmitry, any ideas here? > >> >> >>

Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc5 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r371837. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc5. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc5 Binaries will be added as they become available. There is only a single change from rc4 to rc5. Once more, the hope is that this will be the last release candidate and that we can

Hi, I've just tagged LLVM 9.0.1-rc3. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. This will be the last release candidate unless there is a major problem. I'm planning to tag the final release on Dec 19. -Tom

Hello again, 9.0.0-rc4 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r371490. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc4. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc4 Binaries will be added as they become available. There are not a lot of changes from rc3 to rc4, and there are again no open release blockers, so I'm hoping this will be the last

Hi, I've tagged the LLVM 9.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and upload binaries. I've also updated the test-release.sh script to pull from GitHub instead of SVN, if you run into any issues with the new script, let me know. -Tom

Hi, I've just tagged the 9.0.1-final release. Testers can begin uploading binaries. -Tom

Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc3 was tagged today from the release_90 branch at r370450. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc3. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc3 Binaries will be added as they become available. There are currently no open release blockers, which means if nothing new comes up, the final release could ship soon and this is

Hi, I've tagged LLVM 9.0.1-rc2. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. If all goes well, this will be the last -rc. -Tom

Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc6 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r372100. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc6. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc6 This is the same as rc5 plus one very minor change (r371969) that still seemed good to pick up. I'm not allocating extra time for testing this one, expecting to tag