Re: [Sablevm-developer] regression testing staging@r1575 and sablevm-classpath@r1575 against 1.0.9

[Grzegorz B. P. <ga...@de...>]

W li=B6cie z czw, 12-02-2004, godz. 23:04, Chris Pickett pisze:=20
> You can see the results of the benchmark runs in:
>=20
> http://sable.mcgill.ca/~cpicke/sablevm/r1575-vs-1.0.9/

Great! I've just looked at them, see below.

> *_times_* are the raw benchmark times
> *_report_* are reports, with user times and pass/fail status (see first=
)
> *_diff_* are diffs that caused failure in the reports
> *_paranoid_diff_* are diffs that don't ignore run-specific information
>=20
> Basically:
>=20
> 1) I found no regressions
I have to believe you, because I looked at the diffs and firstly:

I don't know what I am comaring with what. I mean, that you used
just diff, instead of ex. 'diff -u', which would put filenames
into the header.

Second thing, partially being result of the first one: I looked at
http://www.sable.mcgill.ca/~cpicke/sablevm/r1575-vs-1.0.9/grande_section1=
_diff_feb12
and it seems that errors are not identical. I guess that both cases
qualify as "doesn't work", but still - I'd love to know which errors
do we get now. Do I get it right, that w/ 1.0.9 we get link error,
and now we get security provider error (so it's more CP problem)?

> 2) mtrt seems to have been fixed for switch-debug (no blank line)
oh, and how about switch w/o signals? It might be interesting to see.

> 3) JGFSyncBench, JGFLUFactBench, and JGFRayTracerBench fail
>       (single- and multi-threaded errors)
> 4) JGFSerialBench fails, but it fails for java as well
>       (verification error)
> 5) In general things are faster, but there are a couple of exceptions.
Working on it. Inlined is staging is ATM not reliable in terms of speed.
There are good chances to get fixed this weekend.

> 1) A list of known issues (incl. the above benchmark failures and the=20
> fact that synchronized methods may crash the VM)
> 2) A fix for the classpath configure problem (I think the easiest is to=
=20
> undo Mark's configure.ac patch, since apparently this was only for JamV=
M).
I guess we can just undo the change for this moment, but it'd be
best to ask on gnu classpath ML. Hmmm... I think he's on SableVM list.

Mark? :-)

I think Chirs, that you've just pushed 1.1.0 a lot to make it reality.
Thanks a lot!

Cheers,

					Grzegorz B. Prokopski

--=20
Grzegorz B. Prokopski <ga...@de...>
Debian GNU/Linux      http://www.debian.org
SableVM - LGPLed JVM  http://www.sablevm.org
Why SableVM ?!?       http://devel.sablevm.org/wiki/WhySableVM