|
From: Tom H. <th...@cy...> - 2009-07-05 02:49:59
Attachments:
diffs
|
Nightly build on lloyd ( x86_64, Fedora 7 ) Started at 2009-07-05 03:05:05 BST Ended at 2009-07-05 03:49:38 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 == 496 tests, 7 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure, 0 post failures == memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar (stderr) memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_exit_group (stderr) memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_supp (stderr) none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stdout) none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stderr) exp-ptrcheck/tests/ccc (stderr) exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_create (stderr) exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_specific (stderr) ================================================= == 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 == 492 tests, 7 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure, 0 post failures == memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar (stderr) memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_exit_group (stderr) memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_supp (stderr) none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stdout) none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stderr) exp-ptrcheck/tests/ccc (stderr) exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_create (stderr) exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_specific (stderr) ================================================= == Difference between 24 hours ago and now == ================================================= *** old.short Sun Jul 5 03:26:29 2009 --- new.short Sun Jul 5 03:49:38 2009 *************** *** 8,10 **** ! == 492 tests, 7 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure, 0 post failures == memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar (stderr) --- 8,10 ---- ! == 496 tests, 7 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure, 0 post failures == memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar (stderr) |
|
From: Nicholas N. <n.n...@gm...> - 2009-07-06 04:44:39
|
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Tom Hughes<th...@cy...> wrote: > > Nightly build on lloyd ( x86_64, Fedora 7 ) > Started at 2009-07-05 03:05:05 BST > Ended at 2009-07-05 03:49:38 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 > > == 496 tests, 7 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure, 0 post failures == > memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar (stderr) > memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_exit_group (stderr) > memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_supp (stderr) > none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stdout) > none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stderr) > exp-ptrcheck/tests/ccc (stderr) > exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_create (stderr) > exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_specific (stderr) Until recently, this machine had no test failures. Most of the failures seem to be due to the DCAS merge -- Julian, can you take a look? The scalar ones are a bit different, though, there's a conditional-jump-on-undefined that didn't used to be there. Not sure about it. Nick |
|
From: Tom H. <to...@co...> - 2009-07-06 08:30:40
|
On 06/07/09 05:44, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Tom Hughes<th...@cy...> wrote: > >> == 496 tests, 7 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure, 0 post failures == >> memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar (stderr) >> memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_exit_group (stderr) >> memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_supp (stderr) >> none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stdout) >> none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stderr) >> exp-ptrcheck/tests/ccc (stderr) >> exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_create (stderr) >> exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_specific (stderr) > > Until recently, this machine had no test failures. Most of the > failures seem to be due to the DCAS merge -- Julian, can you take a > look? The scalar ones are a bit different, though, there's a > conditional-jump-on-undefined that didn't used to be there. Not sure > about it. The three memcheck ones are all this: ==24018== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) ==24018== at 0x5FF2C2: _dl_runtime_resolve (in /lib/ld-2.6.so) ==24018== by 0x620F6F: (below main) (in /lib/libc-2.6.so) The none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 one is an unsupported instruction failure on cmpxchg16 by the looks of it: vex amd64->IR: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF0 0x49 0xF 0xC7 0xA 0x49 ... ==24044== Process terminating with default action of signal 4 (SIGILL) ==24044== Illegal opcode at address 0x4006D2 ==24044== at 0x4006D2: do_cmpxchg16b (bug127521-64.c:79) ==24044== by 0x4007AA: try16b (bug127521-64.c:106) ==24044== by 0x400A9F: main (bug127521-64.c:135) The ptrcheck ones are all an assertion failure: t4 = CASle(t3::t0->t2) exp-ptrcheck: h_main.c:4820 (schemeS): the 'impossible' happened. ==24071== at 0x38010BFC: report_and_quit (m_libcassert.c:145) ==24071== by 0x38010ECA: vgPlain_assert_fail (m_libcassert.c:216) ==24071== by 0x3800601A: h_instrument (h_main.c:4820) ==24071== by 0x3809694E: LibVEX_Translate (main_main.c:500) ==24071== by 0x38026128: vgPlain_translate (m_translate.c:1517) ==24071== by 0x38048B10: vgPlain_scheduler (scheduler.c:844) ==24071== by 0x3806C71E: run_a_thread_NORETURN (syswrap-linux.c:91) Tom -- Tom Hughes (to...@co...) http://www.compton.nu/ |
|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2009-07-11 12:47:33
|
On Monday 06 July 2009, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 06/07/09 05:44, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Tom Hughes<th...@cy...> wrote: > >> == 496 tests, 7 stderr failures, 1 stdout failure, 0 post failures == > >> memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar (stderr) > >> memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_exit_group (stderr) > >> memcheck/tests/x86-linux/scalar_supp (stderr) > >> none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stdout) > >> none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 (stderr) > >> exp-ptrcheck/tests/ccc (stderr) > >> exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_create (stderr) > >> exp-ptrcheck/tests/pth_specific (stderr) > > > > Until recently, this machine had no test failures. Most of the > > failures seem to be due to the DCAS merge -- Julian, can you take a > > look? The scalar ones are a bit different, though, there's a > > conditional-jump-on-undefined that didn't used to be there. Not sure > > about it. > > The three memcheck ones are all this: > > ==24018== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) > ==24018== at 0x5FF2C2: _dl_runtime_resolve (in /lib/ld-2.6.so) > ==24018== by 0x620F6F: (below main) (in /lib/libc-2.6.so) Am trying to repro this w/ my virtual machine collection. It's elusive. > The none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 one is an unsupported instruction > failure on cmpxchg16 by the looks of it: > > vex amd64->IR: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF0 0x49 0xF 0xC7 0xA 0x49 Can you send me the /proc/cpuinfo for that machine? To support cmpxchg16b properly, vex has to emit cmpxchg16b instruction into the instrumented code, which is different from what it did before (some lame-ass fakery involving normal 64-bit loads and stores). But some really old Opterons don't support cmpxchg16b, which means vex now has to refuse to decode it if doesn't believe the underlying machine can handle it. I guess what is comes to is, none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 shouldn't be run unless the machine supports cmpxchg16b. It would be interesting to know if this test runs natively on the machine. > The ptrcheck ones are all an assertion failure: This fixed now. (+ I have more grey hair :-) J |
|
From: Tom H. <to...@co...> - 2009-07-10 13:57:09
|
On 10/07/09 15:17, Julian Seward wrote: >> The none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 one is an unsupported instruction >> failure on cmpxchg16 by the looks of it: >> >> vex amd64->IR: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF0 0x49 0xF 0xC7 0xA 0x49 > > Can you send me the /proc/cpuinfo for that machine? To support cmpxchg16b > properly, vex has to emit cmpxchg16b instruction into the instrumented code, > which is different from what it did before (some lame-ass fakery involving > normal 64-bit loads and stores). But some really old Opterons don't support > cmpxchg16b, which means vex now has to refuse to decode it if doesn't believe > the underlying machine can handle it. It's an Athon 64 3500+ and you're quite right - it doesn't have the cx16 feature bit set. > I guess what is comes to is, none/tests/amd64/bug127521-64 shouldn't be > run unless the machine supports cmpxchg16b. It would be interesting to > know if this test runs natively on the machine. No, it dies with SIGILL when run natively. So yes, that test needs to be excluded on machines with no cx16 support. Tom -- Tom Hughes (to...@co...) http://www.compton.nu/ |
|
From: Nicholas N. <n.n...@gm...> - 2009-07-10 20:39:28
|
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Tom Hughes<to...@co...> wrote: > So yes, that test needs to be excluded on machines with no cx16 support. A "prereq:" line will do it... it just requires the name of a program that returns 0 or 1 depending on whether cx16 is supported or not. I guess that can be a small C program living in either tests/ (if it seems broadly useful) or in memcheck/tests/amd64-linux/. Nick |
|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2009-07-10 20:51:27
|
On Friday 10 July 2009, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Tom Hughes<to...@co...> wrote: > > So yes, that test needs to be excluded on machines with no cx16 support. > > A "prereq:" line will do it... it just requires the name of a program > that returns 0 or 1 depending on whether cx16 is supported or not. I > guess that can be a small C program living in either tests/ (if it > seems broadly useful) or in memcheck/tests/amd64-linux/. I'm sure we have a standard program to do such checks already, as part of the test suite infrastructure, though. I'll have a look. Main problem is I don't have a cx16-un-capable machine to test on. J |