Home Original page

test results with the 2.35 branch for several architectures

Palmer Dabbelt palmer@dabbelt.com
Tue Jul 21 00:42:11 GMT 2020 
On Wed, 08 Jul 2020 10:49:25 PDT (-0700), Jim Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 7:35 AM Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> With a snapshot taken from the 3.35 on 20200708, I see test failures on some
>> targets, complete logs at
>> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=binutils
>
>> riscv64:
>> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/indirect.exp ...
>> FAIL: Run indirect5 1
>> FAIL: Run indirect5 2
>> FAIL: indirect5a dynsym
>> FAIL: indirect5b dynsym
>> FAIL: Run indirect5 3
>> FAIL: Run indirect5 4
>> FAIL: indirect5c dynsym
>> FAIL: indirect5d dynsym
>> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
>> FAIL: Run pr21964-4
>> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/tls.exp ...
>> FAIL: Build pr22263-1
>
> This is the usual set of failures.  Though curiously the indirect
> tests aren't failing for me on a fedora rawhide system anymore, so
> maybe something got fixed somewhere.  The indirect5c and indirect5d
> still fail for me on a cross build.

For the people who aren't familiar with RISC-V: we maintain a list of allowed
test failures over here:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-gnu-toolchain/tree/master/test/allowlist .
Don't know how well it's pruned any more, though.  They're probably all worth
fixing, but there's only so much time...
More information about the Binutils mailing list