On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 at 18:49, Dennis Clarke via Gcc-help <gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Wish I knew why things fail but seem to not fail at the same time. > Perhaps there is not supposed to be an error status returned back to the > shell? I don't know. No, because you used make -k which means that errors are ignored. > > Anyways on an old Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 machine ( AMD64 ) I have > carefully bootstrapped GCC 12.1.0 over and over and over again. With new > binutils installed also. I also built dejagnu and tcl and the usual > little bits we need to run the testsuite. I should point out that this > is an old slow machine ( by modern standards ) but it runs just fine. > > After about a day and 13 hours and 45 minutes of "make -k check" running Even on a uniprocessor you would get some speed-up from -j2 and if you have more cores you can run with additional jobs. > I see this : > > . > srcdir='../../../../gcc-12.1.0/libatomic/testsuite'; export srcdir; \ > EXPECT=expect; export EXPECT; \ > if /bin/sh -c "runtest --version" > /dev/null 2>&1; then \ > exit_status=0; l='libatomic'; for tool in $l; do \ > if runtest --tool $tool --srcdir $srcdir ; \ > then :; else exit_status=1; fi; \ > done; \ > else echo "WARNING: could not find 'runtest'" 1>&2; :;\ > fi; \ > exit $exit_status > WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. > Using ../../../../gcc-12.1.0/libatomic/testsuite/lib/libatomic.exp as > tool init file. > Test run by dclarke on Wed Jun 1 07:41:54 2022 > Native configuration is x86_64-pc-linux-gnu > > === libatomic tests === > > Schedule of variations: > unix > > Running target unix > Using /opt/bw/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description > file for target. > Using /opt/bw/share/dejagnu/config/unix.exp as generic interface file > for target. > Using ../../../../gcc-12.1.0/libatomic/testsuite/config/default.exp as > tool-and-target-specific interface file. > Running ../../../../gcc-12.1.0/libatomic/testsuite/libatomic.c/c.exp ... > > === libatomic Summary === > > # of expected passes 54 > make[4]: Leaving directory > `/opt/bw/build/gcc-12.1.0_rhel6_amd64.007/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libatomic/testsuite' > make[3]: Leaving directory > `/opt/bw/build/gcc-12.1.0_rhel6_amd64.007/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libatomic/testsuite' > make[3]: Entering directory > `/opt/bw/build/gcc-12.1.0_rhel6_amd64.007/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libatomic' > Makefile:875: warning: overriding commands for target `all-multi' > Makefile:866: warning: ignoring old commands for target `all-multi' > true DO=all multi-do # make > make[3]: Leaving directory > `/opt/bw/build/gcc-12.1.0_rhel6_amd64.007/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libatomic' > make[2]: Leaving directory > `/opt/bw/build/gcc-12.1.0_rhel6_amd64.007/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libatomic' > make[1]: Leaving directory `/opt/bw/build/gcc-12.1.0_rhel6_amd64.007' > make: *** [do-check] Error 2 > make: Target `check' not remade because of errors. > real 135930.17 > user 122350.27 > sys 14525.06 > mimas$ echo $? > 0 > mimas$ > > I have no idea what happened there and no idea how much longer things > could have been left quietly churning away but there seems to be an > issue in the libatomic section of life. Somewhere. > > Is there a way to manually isolate just this test section and then > figure out what went wrong? I don't see any errors in the libatomic results, I think that's coming from an earlier testsuite. Because you used "make -k" it will keep going after earlier errors, and so run the later testsuites (like libitm and libatomic). The error isn't coming from the last step though. Look at the rest of the test results, not just the end. There will be at least one failure (but that's common, especially on an ancient system with an old glibc).
