On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 21:16, Burton, Ross <ross.bur...@intel.com> wrote: > > This is awesome! > > On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 12:39, Nathan Rossi <nat...@nathanrossi.com> wrote: > > | gcc | g++ | libstdc++ | binutils | gas > > | ld | glibc > > x86-64 | 589/135169 | 457/131913 | 1/13008 | 0/ 236 | 0/ > > 1256 | 166/ 1975 | 1423/ 5991 > > arm | 469/123905 | 365/128416 | 19/12788 | 0/ 191 | 0/ > > 872 | 155/ 1479 | 64/ 5130 > > aarch64 | 460/130904 | 364/128977 | 1/12789 | 0/ 190 | 0/ > > 442 | 157/ 1474 | 76/ 5882 > > powerpc | 18336/116624 | 6747/128636 | 33/12996 | 0/ 187 | 1/ > > 265 | 157/ 1352 | 1218/ 5110 > > mips64 | 1174/134744 | 401/130195 | 22/12780 | 0/ 213 | 43/ > > 7245 | 803/ 1634 | 2032/ 5847 > > riscv64 | 456/106399 | 376/128427 | 1/12748 | 0/ 185 | 0/ > > 257 | 152/ 1062 | 88/ 5847 > > So what I'm really interested in is what those numbers look like for > e.g. x86-64 on real hardware: are the test suites always failing a > bit, or are these indicative of problems we've introduced?
Just to clarify, by real hardware are you interested in the tests running against a system running with a oe distro + kernel. Or just running on e.g. the build host? As for the failing tests, do not put to much emphasis on the values provided. I am sure there are a number of tests that are failing due to minor configuration issues that simply need a deeper look at the test result and output to fix the issue. And the large number of failures for powerpc are due to qemu user failing due to illegal instruction. The goal would be to get the results similar to what other users/distro get, by reviewing results posted here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/. And for glibc the results from: https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.29 Thanks, Nathan -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
