Hi all,
On 12.06.24 15:19, René Rebe wrote:
On Jun 12, 2024, at 15:00, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024, René Rebe wrote:
On Jun 12, 2024, at 13:01, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024, Rene Rebe wrote:
not sure how you exactly did this though? I've never tried
testing of a canadian-cross tree - did you copy the whole build
tree over from the x86 to the ia64 machine?
IIRC the testsuite did not just work copying the canadian-cross.
I did run the testsuite from the cross-compiled gcc using a ssh
based dejagnu board config, but Frank also did fully bootstrap and
ran the testsuite natively.
Exactly, the results I posted are both based on natively bootstrapped
GCC binaries (took ca. 5 hours each on my rx2800 i2). The post titles
include the exact commit hash they are based on:
1. [ia64] Results for 15.0.0 20240528 (experimental) [master revision
236116068151bbc72aaaf53d0f223fe06f7e3bac] (GCC) testsuite on
ia64-t2-linux-gnu ([1])
2. [ia64] Results for 15.0.0 20240528 (experimental) [master revision
236116068151bbc72aaaf53d0f223fe06f7e3bac] (GCC) w/LRA testsuite on
ia64-t2-linux-gnu ([2])
[1]: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2024-May/816346.html
[2]: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2024-May/816422.html
I tried to save time during the testsuite runs (it still took more than
7 hours on my rx2800 i2 running in tmpfs) by manually running multiple
testsuites in parallel in the following fashion:
```
gcc | libstdc++
|
|
----------|
g++ |
|
|
----------|
gfortran |
|
|
----------|
libgomp |-----------
| libatomic
|-----------
| objc
```
... and also using multiple jobs per testsuite where it saved time (e.g.
it does not for the libgomp testsuite). This is the reason that the
output is somewhat split up.
[1] and [2] each also list the commands used to run the testsuites and
timing data. For reference these were produced on a:
rx2800 i2 w/1 x Itanium 2 9320 running @1.33 GHz w/SMT enabled
Cheers,
Frank
