|
From: Tom H. <th...@cy...> - 2005-08-26 02:27:58
|
Nightly build on alvis ( i686, Red Hat 7.3 ) started at 2005-08-26 03:15:03 BST Results differ from 24 hours ago Checking out valgrind source tree ... done Configuring valgrind ... done Building valgrind ... done Running regression tests ... failed Regression test results follow == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 2 stdout failures ================= memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) memcheck/tests/describe-block (stderr) memcheck/tests/erringfds (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-0 (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-cycle (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-regroot (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-tree (stderr) memcheck/tests/match-overrun (stderr) memcheck/tests/partiallydefinedeq (stderr) memcheck/tests/pointer-trace (stderr) memcheck/tests/sigkill (stderr) memcheck/tests/stack_changes (stderr) none/tests/faultstatus (stderr) none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stdout) none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stderr) none/tests/x86/int (stderr) none/tests/x86/yield (stdout) ================================================= == Results from 24 hours ago == ================================================= Checking out valgrind source tree ... done Configuring valgrind ... done Building valgrind ... done Running regression tests ... failed Regression test results follow == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure ================= memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) memcheck/tests/describe-block (stderr) memcheck/tests/erringfds (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-0 (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-cycle (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-regroot (stderr) memcheck/tests/leak-tree (stderr) memcheck/tests/match-overrun (stderr) memcheck/tests/partiallydefinedeq (stderr) memcheck/tests/pointer-trace (stderr) memcheck/tests/sigkill (stderr) memcheck/tests/stack_changes (stderr) none/tests/faultstatus (stderr) none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stdout) none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stderr) none/tests/x86/int (stderr) ================================================= == Difference between 24 hours ago and now == ================================================= *** old.short Fri Aug 26 03:21:25 2005 --- new.short Fri Aug 26 03:27:51 2005 *************** *** 8,10 **** ! == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure ================= memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) --- 8,10 ---- ! == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 2 stdout failures ================= memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) *************** *** 25,26 **** --- 25,27 ---- none/tests/x86/int (stderr) + none/tests/x86/yield (stdout) |
|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2005-08-26 09:12:46
|
Tom Why does none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b completely fail on alvis? It's the only one I've seen where it fails, and it's a pretty simple test. Am curious. J On Friday 26 August 2005 03:27, Tom Hughes wrote: > Nightly build on alvis ( i686, Red Hat 7.3 ) started at 2005-08-26 03:15:03 > BST Results differ from 24 hours ago > > Checking out valgrind source tree ... done > Configuring valgrind ... done > Building valgrind ... done > Running regression tests ... failed > > Regression test results follow > > == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 2 stdout failures ================= > memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) > memcheck/tests/describe-block (stderr) > memcheck/tests/erringfds (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-0 (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-cycle (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-regroot (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-tree (stderr) > memcheck/tests/match-overrun (stderr) > memcheck/tests/partiallydefinedeq (stderr) > memcheck/tests/pointer-trace (stderr) > memcheck/tests/sigkill (stderr) > memcheck/tests/stack_changes (stderr) > none/tests/faultstatus (stderr) > none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stdout) > none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stderr) > none/tests/x86/int (stderr) > none/tests/x86/yield (stdout) > > ================================================= > == Results from 24 hours ago == > ================================================= > > Checking out valgrind source tree ... done > Configuring valgrind ... done > Building valgrind ... done > Running regression tests ... failed > > Regression test results follow > > == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure ================= > memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) > memcheck/tests/describe-block (stderr) > memcheck/tests/erringfds (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-0 (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-cycle (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-regroot (stderr) > memcheck/tests/leak-tree (stderr) > memcheck/tests/match-overrun (stderr) > memcheck/tests/partiallydefinedeq (stderr) > memcheck/tests/pointer-trace (stderr) > memcheck/tests/sigkill (stderr) > memcheck/tests/stack_changes (stderr) > none/tests/faultstatus (stderr) > none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stdout) > none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b (stderr) > none/tests/x86/int (stderr) > > > ================================================= > == Difference between 24 hours ago and now == > ================================================= > > *** old.short Fri Aug 26 03:21:25 2005 > --- new.short Fri Aug 26 03:27:51 2005 > *************** > *** 8,10 **** > > ! == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure ================= > memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) > --- 8,10 ---- > > ! == 186 tests, 15 stderr failures, 2 stdout failures ================= > memcheck/tests/addressable (stderr) > *************** > *** 25,26 **** > --- 25,27 ---- > none/tests/x86/int (stderr) > + none/tests/x86/yield (stdout) > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO > September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf > _______________________________________________ > Valgrind-developers mailing list > Val...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers |
|
From: Tom H. <to...@co...> - 2005-08-26 09:58:51
|
In message <200...@ac...>
Julian Seward <js...@ac...> wrote:
> Why does none/tests/x86/cmpxchg8b completely fail on alvis? It's
> the only one I've seen where it fails, and it's a pretty simple
> test. Am curious.
The code in the assembly routine to restore the register was not
restoring %ebx properly and as main didn't have any need to save
and restore it on that machine the program was dying when glibc tried
to make a call through the PLT during the program exit sequence.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (to...@co...)
http://www.compton.nu/
|
|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2005-08-26 10:09:12
|
> The code in the assembly routine to restore the register was not > restoring %ebx properly Wow. Well spotted. J |