From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/10732 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: x86_64 gcc test failures at the end of gcc-7 stage 1 Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 19:25:23 -0500 Message-ID: <20161113002523.GP1555@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20161112174350.GQ5749@port70.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1478996760 22012 195.159.176.226 (13 Nov 2016 00:26:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 00:26:00 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-10745-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Nov 13 01:25:56 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c5ic4-0002gf-Nc for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Nov 2016 01:25:36 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 10216 invoked by uid 550); 13 Nov 2016 00:25:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 10189 invoked from network); 13 Nov 2016 00:25:37 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161112174350.GQ5749@port70.net> Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:10732 Archived-At: On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 06:43:50PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > my analysis of gcc test failures i've seen on x86_64-linux-musl > (gcc, g++, gfortran, libstdc++): > > unwind/throw across signal handler (sigreturn unwind info is missing in musl) > FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-10.c execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-11.c execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-8.c execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-9.c execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/eh/sighandle.C -std=gnu++11 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/eh/sighandle.C -std=gnu++14 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/eh/sighandle.C -std=gnu++98 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-10.C -std=gnu++11 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-10.C -std=gnu++14 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-10.C -std=gnu++98 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-11.C -std=gnu++11 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-11.C -std=gnu++14 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-11.C -std=gnu++98 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-8.C -std=gnu++11 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-8.C -std=gnu++14 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-8.C -std=gnu++98 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-9.C -std=gnu++11 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-9.C -std=gnu++14 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/cleanup-9.C -std=gnu++98 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/sync-4.C -std=gnu++11 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/sync-4.C -std=gnu++14 execution test > FAIL: g++.dg/ext/sync-4.C -std=gnu++98 execution test I think these are not supported/intended to work. > throw from libc callback (pthread_once unwind info is missing) > FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test > FAIL: 30_threads/packaged_task/forced_unwind.cc execution test This failure is expected/intentional. Even if there were unwind info, it would not be safe to jump out and leave the state of the once object inconsistent. > missing ucontext api (makecontext, swapcontext) > FAIL: gcc.dg/split-5.c (test for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/split-5.c compilation failed to produce executable > > missing fortify api (__memcpy_chk) > FAIL: gcc.dg/strlenopt-2f.c (test for excess errors) > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/strlenopt-2f.c compilation failed to produce executable > > no short wchar support (__WCHAR_TYPE__ is ignored) > FAIL: gcc.dg/utf-array-short-wchar.c (test for errors, line 39) > FAIL: gcc.dg/utf-array-short-wchar.c (test for errors, line 41) > FAIL: gcc.dg/utf-array-short-wchar.c (test for excess errors) Also intentional/a feature. :-) > math_errhandling & MATH_ERRNO is not supported > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O0 execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O1 execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O2 execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -O3 -g execution test > FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c -Os execution test Likewise. > testcase redefines __inline > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx-1.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx-2.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse-13.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse-14.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse-22.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse-22a.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse-23.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse-24.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse-25.c (test for excess errors) Would refraining from defining it when __GNUC__ is defined fix these tests? We could consider that. Or we could just use a different name for it internally, e.g.: #if __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L || defined(__cplusplus) #define ___inline inline #elif defined(__GNUC__) #define ___inline __inline #else #define ___inline #endif > math/complex precision test failures > FAIL: gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90 -O0 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90 -O1 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90 -O2 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90 -O3 -g execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90 -Os execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/complex_intrinsic_5.f90 -O0 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/complex_intrinsic_5.f90 -O1 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/complex_intrinsic_5.f90 -O2 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/complex_intrinsic_5.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/complex_intrinsic_5.f90 -O3 -g execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/complex_intrinsic_5.f90 -Os execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 -O0 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 -O1 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 -O2 execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 -O3 -g execution test > FAIL: gfortran.dg/erf_3.F90 -Os execution test > FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/13450.cc execution test To be fixed eventually, I guess? > gnu vs generic c++ locale abi diff > FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check Probably a non-issue, and almost certainly doesn't make sense to change (break) at this point anyway. > FILE is incomplete > FAIL: 27_io/headers/cstdio/types_std.cc (test for excess errors) Intentional. > gcc plugins fail with cross libc testing (when running tests on glibc host) > FAIL: gcc.dg/plugin/* > FAIL: g++.dg/plugin/* > > known gcc-trunk failures > FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-1.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr68279.f90 -O (internal compiler error) > FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr68279.f90 -O (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/vrp7.c scan-ipa-dump-times cp "Setting value range of param 0 \\\\[-10, 9\\\\]" 1 > > unknown: > FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr69270-3.c scan-tree-dump-times uncprop1 ", 1" 4 > FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray/event_2.f90 -fcoarray=lib -O2 -lcaf_single -latomic execution test Not sure about any of these. Rich