[llvm-commits] [PATCH] Adding the Linpack test to the test suite

[David Blaikie]

judging by the logs (
http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86_64-linux-fnt/builds/5/steps/make.test-suite/logs/stdio
) it's a build failure of gcc-loops, so a timeout might not be helpful
here.

That being said, it could be a misconfiguration of the machine (this
slave was just recently resurrected) rather than a problem with the
test, I'm not sure.

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:
> Linpack is not failing any more, but "gcc-loops" is failing.   Can we increase the timeout ?
>
> On Dec 7, 2012, at 3:16 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Still seeing failures of these (including on the newly brought-up osu8):
>>
>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86_64-linux-fnt/builds/5/steps/make.test-suite/logs/fail.LLC
>> (shows livermoorloops & scimark, not sure if linpack is still failing
>> anywhere)
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> Thanks for letting me know about this.  It looks like Linpack, SciMark and Livermoore are still failing. Do we know when SciMark started failing ?
>>>
>>> I will look at it later today or tomorrow.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 25, 2012, at 11:17 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not sure if this has passed previously, but it's failing on
>>>> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-x86_64-debian-fnt/builds/12074/steps/make.test-suite/logs/fail.LLC
>>>>
>>>> Could you please investigate/fix. (it'd be nice to get the bots green)
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:
>>>>> At first I thought that only stdout is compared. But after I noticed that stderr is also compared I removed the time prints altogether. I also added a reference file for the test.
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 16, 2012, at 1:02 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Nadav,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16/11/12 02:02, Nadav Rotem wrote:
>>>>>>> I removed the parts of the code that rely on timers to calculate the number of iterations.  However, I left the time measurements that are printed to stderr.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> won't that result in spurious failures when comparing against the GCC output
>>>>>> or the reference output, because the printed times won't be the same?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ciao, Duncan.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 15, 2012, at 4:58 PM, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Nadav,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did you remove all the timing stuff from the code?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Evan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Nov 15, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here is a patch for adding Roy Longbottom's Linpack benchmark.  Roy agreed that we include the benchmark in our test suite.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <test_suite_linpack.diff>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Nadav
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> llvm-commits mailing list
>>>>>>>>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> llvm-commits mailing list
>>>>>>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> llvm-commits mailing list
>>>>>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> llvm-commits mailing list
>>>>> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>>>
>