[#5888] bfin-uclinux-libmudflap-4.3.sum pass40-frag.c output pattern test regress

Submitted By: Mingquan Pan

Open Date

2010-02-08 02:08:39

Priority:

Medium Assignee:

Nobody

Board:

N/A Silicon Revision:

Resolution:

Assigned (Not Started) Fixed In Release:

N/A

Processor:

BF527

Host Operating System:

toolchain rev.:

trunk head 4.3 kernel rev.:

State:

Open Found In Release:

N/A

Is this bug repeatable?:

N/A

Summary: bfin-uclinux-libmudflap-4.3.sum pass40-frag.c output pattern test regress

Details:

bfin-uclinux-libmudflap-4.3.sum pass40-frag.c output pattern test regress compared with 4.1 test results.

Tests that now fail, but worked before:

bfin-uclinux: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-O2) output pattern test

bfin-uclinux: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-O3) output pattern test

bfin-uclinux: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c output pattern test

bfin-uclinux: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-static -DSTATIC) output pattern test

The log is:

Executing on host: bfin-uclinux-gcc -ggdb3 -DDEBUG_ASSERT -I/home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite -I/home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/.. -I.. -L/.libs /home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c -O2 -fmudflapth -lmudflapth -lpthread -Wl,--noinhibit-exec -Wl,-elf2flt=-s80000 -L/testsuite -lm -o ./pass40-frag.exe (timeout = 20)

spawn bfin-uclinux-gcc -ggdb3 -DDEBUG_ASSERT -I/home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite -I/home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/.. -I.. -L/.libs /home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c -O2 -fmudflapth -lmudflapth -lpthread -Wl,--noinhibit-exec -Wl,-elf2flt=-s80000 -L/testsuite -lm -o ./pass40-frag.exe^M

PASS: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-O2) (test for excess errors)

Executing on bfin-uclinux: /tmp/pass40-frag.exe.23295 (timeout = 300)

Executing on bfin-uclinux: rm -f /tmp/pass40-frag.exe.23295 (timeout = 300)

Executed ./pass40-frag.exe, status 0

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000

2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000

3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 4000

4100 4200 4300 4400 4500 4600 4700 4800 4900 5000

5100 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600 5700 5800 5900 6000

6100 6200 6300 6400 6500 6600 6700 6800 6900 7000

7100 7200 7300 7400 7500 7600 7700 7800 7900 8000

8100 8200 8300 8400 8500 8600 8700 8800 8900 9000

9100 9200 9300 9400 9500 9600 9700 9800 9900 10000

PASS: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-O2) execution test

FAIL: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-O2) output pattern test

Output pattern 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000

2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000

3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 4000

4100 4200 4300 4400 4500 4600 4700 4800 4900 5000

5100 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600 5700 5800 5900 6000

6100 6200 6300 6400 6500 6600 6700 6800 6900 7000

7100 7200 7300 7400 7500 7600 7700 7800 7900 8000

8100 8200 8300 8400 8500 8600 8700 8800 8900 9000

9100 9200 9300 9400 9500 9600 9700 9800 9900 10000

Follow-ups

--- Stuart Henderson 2010-07-22 08:19:08

i swear i added a comment here.

anyway, this looks suspiciously correct. the output pattern test is failing,

but the output looks spot on to me. i'm still investigating.

--- Stuart Henderson 2010-08-05 09:59:43

It looks like tests which expect the last character of output to be a newline

fail (this is also the reason for [#6126] failing), unless there is further

output from the test. This is most likely not a problem with the toolchain so I

suggest we downgrade this to priority 3 and update the test to expect to fail

for just now. any objections?

The reason this is a regression is because in 4.1 we were getting a libmudflap

violation after all the test output, meaning there *was* a new line and the test

passed.

so the test passed when it was failing and now fails because it's passing.

--- Sonic Zhang 2010-08-09 07:10:14

Fail in both 4.1 and 4.3. Not regression bugs. Low priority. Stuart should mark

them XFAIL in test cases and defer to next release.

--- Stuart Henderson 2010-08-09 10:33:23

Updated the following tests to expect to fail:

gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c

gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.cth/pass59-frag.c

--- Mike Frysinger 2010-08-09 12:31:46

there is no real point in setting tests as XFAIL. we already have a tracker

item for it as well as a wiki page where we list for each release the items

expected to fail. XFAIL is useful really only when we go sending the change

upstream.

--- Mingquan Pan 2012-06-13 06:50:20

It is now failing like this:

Executing on bfin-uclinux: /tmp/pass40-frag.exe.20177 {} {} (timeout = 300)

spawn [open ...]^M

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000

2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000

3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 4000

4100 4200 4300 4400 4500 4600 4700 4800 4900 5000

5100 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600 5700 5800 5900 6000

6100 6200 6300 6400 6500 6600 6700 6800 6900 7000

7100 7200 7300 7400 7500 7600 7700 7800 7900 8000

8100 8200 8300 8400 8500 8600 8700 8800 8900 9000

9100 WARNING: program timed out.

Executing on bfin-uclinux: rm -f /tmp/pass40-frag.exe.20177 (timeout =

300)

spawn [open ...]^M

XYZ0ZYX

Executed ./pass40-frag.exe, status 1

rsh to bfin-uclinux failed for /tmp/pass40-frag.exe.20177, 100 200 300 400 500

600 700 800 900 1000

1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000

2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000

3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 4000

4100 4200 4300 4400 4500 4600 4700 4800 4900 5000

5100 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600 5700 5800 5900 6000

6100 6200 6300 6400 6500 6600 6700 6800 6900 7000

7100 7200 7300 7400 7500 7600 7700 7800 7900 8000

8100 8200 8300 8400 8500 8600 8700 8800 8900 9000

9100

FAIL: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-O2) execution test

XFAIL: libmudflap.cth/pass40-frag.c (-O2) output pattern test

Output pattern 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000

2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 2900 3000

3100 3200 3300 3400 3500 3600 3700 3800 3900 4000

4100 4200 4300 4400 4500 4600 4700 4800 4900 5000

5100 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600 5700 5800 5900 6000

6100 6200 6300 6400 6500 6600 6700 6800 6900 7000

7100 7200 7300 7400 7500 7600 7700 7800 7900 8000

8100 8200 8300 8400 8500 8600 8700 8800 8900 9000

9100 9200 9300 9400 9500 9600 9700 9800 9900 10000

...

Executing on bfin-uclinux: /tmp/pass42-frag.exe.20177 {} {} (timeout = 300)

spawn [open ...]^M

*******

mudflap violation 1 (check/write): time=1339289204.245361 ptr=0xSEGV

XYZ139ZYX

311da3d size=1

pc=0x310f962

location=`/home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.c/pass42-frag.c:7:3

(foo)'

[0x0x310e8ba]

Nearby object 1: checked region begins 887B before and ends 887B before

mudflap object 0x2e2659c: name=`errno area'

bounds=[0x311ddb4,0x311ddb7] size=4 area=static check=0r/0w liveness=0

alloc time=1339289204.245304 pc=0x310f522

number of nearby objects: 1

Executing on bfin-uclinux: rm -f /tmp/pass42-frag.exe.20177 (timeout =

300)

spawn [open ...]^M

XYZ0ZYX

Executed ./pass42-frag.exe, status 1

*******

mudflap violation 1 (check/write): time=1339289204.245361 ptr=0xSEGV

311da3d size=1

pc=0x310f962

location=`/home/test/work/cruise/checkouts/toolchain/gcc-4.3/libmudflap/testsuite/libmudflap.c/pass42-frag.c:7:3

(foo)'

[0x0x310e8ba]

Nearby object 1: checked region begins 887B before and ends 887B before

mudflap object 0x2e2659c: name=`errno area'

bounds=[0x311ddb4,0x311ddb7] size=4 area=static check=0r/0w liveness=0

alloc time=1339289204.245304 pc=0x310f522

number of nearby objects: 1

FAIL: libmudflap.c/pass42-frag.c execution test

FAIL: libmudflap.c/pass42-frag.c output pattern test

Files

Changes

Commits

Dependencies

Duplicates

Associations