This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Buffer overrun while doing tests like format/c90-printf-1.c on linux?
- From: Joern Rennecke <joern dot rennecke at superh dot com>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: David Ronis <ronis at ronispc dot chem dot mcgill dot ca>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 18:52:04 +0100
- Subject: Buffer overrun while doing tests like format/c90-printf-1.c on linux?
- Organization: SuperH UK Ltd.
Alexandre, David, what version of the kernel / libexpect /
libtcl / libdl / libm / libutil / libc / dejagnu / expect are
you using so that you can get consistently clean results?
Or are you checking the results by hand to make sure they
are sound?
--
--------------------------
SuperH
2430 Aztec West / Almondsbury / BRISTOL / BS32 4AQ
T:+44 1454 462330
I've been seen sporadical spurious failures for tests that generate
a lot of gcc diagnostic output. Looking at the log file, it appears
that the output is truncated, so that one ore more tests for
warnings / errors fail, and then an incomplete warning / error
line is reported as excess errors. I've seen this both on
liux native tests and linux-hosted cross simulator tests.
The pattern that appears most often is:
FAIL: gcc.dg/format/c90-printf-1.c %s with NULL (test for warnings, line 236)
FAIL: gcc.dg/format/c90-printf-1.c (test for excess errors)
I've searched the gcc mailing list for c90-printf-1.c, and found one match,
then searched the gcc-testresults mailing list, and the search engine
reported 329 matches, but would display only the first 100. Of these 100,
83 actually showed the test for warnings / test for excess errors
pattern for c90-printf-1.c
I've calculated percentages using the assumption that the distributions of
failures in the undisplayed 229 search results are the same as in the 100
displayed ones.
i586-pc-linux-gnu
Glen Nakamura http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-05/msg02035.html
powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
Mark Wielaard http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-07/msg00483.html
(total 167) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-07/msg00139.html
(33.5%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00824.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00739.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00588.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00469.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00447.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00155.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg01089.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00878.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00797.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00786.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00521.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00489.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00355.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00044.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00769.html
i686-pc-linux-gnu
Andris Pavenis http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-07/msg00193.html
(total 806) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg01113.html
(6.94%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00605.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00390.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00301.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00223.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00196.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00112.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00027.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00865.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00759.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00498.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-01/msg00391.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-01/msg00319.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-01/msg00033.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00351.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00313.html
Andreas Jaeger http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-07/msg00040.html
(total 941) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00388.html
(3.50%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00648.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00608.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00422.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-02/msg00081.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00253.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00108.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00016.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-11/msg00397.html
Gordon Sadler http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00454.html
(total 578) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00678.html
(7.97%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00472.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00749.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00570.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00227.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-02/msg00314.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-02/msg00201.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-01/msg00436.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00446.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00399.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00239.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00202.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-11/msg00348.html
Neil Booth http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00822.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00648.html
(total 205 - 3.21%)
Michael Ritzert http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00456.html
(total 110 - 2.99%)
Peter Schmid http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00129.html
(total 179 - 1.84%)
Postings of test results for i686-linux-gnu by people who posted since April:
Andrew Pinski: 73 postings - 0%
David Ronis: 183 postings - 0.0%
vin shelton: 38 postings - 0%
Joe Buck: 9 postings - 0%
root: 52 postings - 0%
Alexandre Oliva: 143 postings - 0.0%
Mark Wielaard: 18 postings - 0%
BLK Administrator - 1 posting
H.J. Lu - the search engine is useless for this name.
Brad Lucier: 22 postings - 0.0%
hppa-unknown-linux-gnu
John David Anglin http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00844.html
(total 63) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00373.html
(15.6%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-03/msg00518.html
sparc-redhat-linux-gnu
Horst von Brand http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00727.html
(total 335) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg01102.html
(2.95%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg01075.html
sparc-suse-linux-gnu
Robert Schiele http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00684.html
(total 101) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00703.html
(16.3%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00690.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00550.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00515.html
alphaev56-unknown-linux-gnu
H. J. Lu http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-06/msg00045.html
(total 50) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00977.html
(26.3%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00993.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00872.html
i486-suse-linux-gnu
Robert Schiele http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-05/msg00445.html
alpha-suse-linux-gnu
Robert Schiele http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00524.html
(total 15) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00462.html
(65.8%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00230.html
i586-redhat-linux-gnu
Gcc k6 testing account
(total 101) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-01/msg00049.html
(6.51%) http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2001-12/msg00366.html