On 09/10/2017 03:22 AM, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote: > On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Uwe Kleine-König <u...@kleine-koenig.org> > wrote: >> >> I tried this on ppc64le and it fixes 2 tests, so were at >> >> Out of 287 tests, 273 passed, 14 failed (10 of them are known to >> fail) >> >> The repaired tests are: >> >> backend/hello.c >> backend/sum.c >> >> unexpected failures are: >> >> backend/arithmetic-ops.c >> backend/cmp-ops.c >> backend/int-cond.c >> backend/logical-ops.c >> >> These are not about missing preprocessor tokens as there are no system >> includes used, but the error there is >> >> Error: unrecognized opcode: `...` >> >> . I didn't look into what the problem is there, but attached the test >> log. > > It clearly looks as the code generated by LLVM (the machine code/assembly > not LLVM's bytecode) is not understood by the assembler (or at least some > instructions). Probably a mismatch with the architecture version or something > like that. > >> I did a build test on a few other Debian machines, arm64 was fine, mips >> and mipx64el had 15 failures, ppc64 (i.e. big endian) had 12. I didn't >> look in more detail and suggest to tackle one after the other :-) > > I fully test on x86, x86-64, arm & ARM64 (with LLVM 3.9 or 4.0). > I also test on ppc64 but not the LLVM part because the machines I have > access to have not LLVM installed and I never bothered to install it myself. > > Would it be possible to have access to a machine with the architectures > you care about?
Debian provides access to porter boxes for such problems. See https://dsa.debian.org/doc/guest-account/. > Meanwhile, is it possible to have the build logs but with 'make V=1 ...' ? > It would also be useful to have: > - the output of 'uname -a' > - the details about the version of LLVM you're using Sure, can do. Attached is a build from the ppc64el machine with Chris' patch applied. Tell me if it contains everything you need. > On the other hand, you/us should disable the sparse-llvm part since: > - it's something that is bundled and build by default but absolutely not > needed (or even useful) to use sparse. > - it hasn't been written for anything else than x86/x86-64 (no 'layout' > for anything else than those architectures. With your patch applied I get (independent of having Chris' patch applied or not): Out of 265 tests, 255 passed, 10 failed (10 of them are known to fail) Best regards Uwe
buildlog-23a393b1cd48ea50bff94fa4a1e2c02a5d78d9cb+
Description: Binary data
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
