This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
| Other format: | [Raw text] | |
The branch is in sync with mainline as of 2004-04-28. The only
remaining items to address should be testsuite failures wrt to mainline.
The following are the merge criteria we had agreed to address and their
status. Feedback on missed items welcome.
* The .dot flowgraph dumps will be renamed to .vcg and the output
will be checked to verify that it can be parsed by VCG.
NOT DONE. I will check this out tomorrow.
* New -f and --param command line options described in
doc/invoke.texi.
DONE.
* New tree codes described in c-tree.texi. Additional internal
documentation files for the new passes, data structures and
functions will also be added.
DONE.
* Verify function and file-level documentation to make sure it's
up-to-date.
DONE.
* Update/finish gfortran.texi.
MOSTLY DONE. Fortran is still in a state of flux, we agreed
that the document is still incomplete and work on it will
continue post-merge.
* Rewrite passes.texi. In particular the FE->optimizer interface.
DONE.
* Regression tests showing no regressions with respect to mainline
before the merge.
On i686 the branch presents these new failures:
==========================================================================
New regressions in gcc
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20010605-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20010605-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040313-1.c execution
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040313-1.c execution
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040313-1.c execution
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040313-1.c execution
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040313-1.c execution
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040313-1.c execution
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/921017-1.c compilation
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/921017-1.c compilation
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/921017-1.c compilation
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/921017-1.c compilation
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/921017-1.c compilation
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/921017-1.c compilation
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/builtin-ctype-2.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 209: expected branch percentages not found: 25
FAIL: gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4b.c gcov: 0 failures in line counts
New regressions in g++
FAIL: 258: expected branch percentages not found: 25
FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C gcov: 0 failures in line counts
FAIL: 23:is 2:should be 1
FAIL: g++.dg/gcov/gcov-2.C gcov: 1 failures in line counts
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.brendan/crash13.C (test for errors
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.law/friend5.C (test for errors
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.law/friend5.C (test for errors
New regressions in libjava
FAIL: PR4766 -O3 compilation from source
FAIL: Array_3 execution - gij test
FAIL: Array_3 execution - gij test
FAIL: String_overflow -O3 compilation from source
FAIL: err3 output - source compiled test
FAIL: err3 -O3 output - source compiled test
==========================================================================
This is the reason why the branch is frozen now. I think that
these regressions are the only merge blocker now.
* Bootstrapped and tested on:
alphaev67-unknown-linux-gnu
i686-pc-linux-gnu
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
ia64-unknown-linux-gnu
sparc-sun-solaris2.8
i386-unknown-freebsd4.8
DONE. I am not sure what the status is on sparc-sun-solaris2.8
after the last merge. It was working up to that point, I
believe. Gerald had problems with i386-unknown-freebsd4.8 but
he stated that it may not be related to the branch. Gerald, any
news there?
* Built and tested on embedded target mn10300-elf.
DONE. Results for the latest merge point should be available
shortly (tests are still running).
* Applications and Fedora Core packages.
DONE. Pass rate for FC is around 97%. AFAIK, all the other
major applications build (Gerald, Richard G., please check).
* Testcases in the testsuite for all new features.
DONE.
* SPECint and SPECfp performance within 3% of mainline.
DONE. Attached are results i686 and x86-64 as of 2004-05-03.
Base results are for mainline. Peak results are for tree-ssa.
* Bootstrap times within 1-5% of mainline configured with
--disable-libmudflap --without-libbanshee --disable-checking
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,objc
DONE. In absolute terms, tree-ssa bootstrap times are 13.5%
slower. But given that there is ~9% more C code in tree-ssa's
source base, we are within range.
* POOMA, DLV and MICO compile times and memory consumption within
1-5% of mainline.
NOT SURE. I *think* we are within range, but I don't have
recent figures. Could the application owners check that I'm not
babbling nonsense?
I think that one more week should be enough to finish up the remaining
regressions. Some of them may be fixable. Others may need more
extensive work. I would first like to characterize them and decide
whether to fix in branch or post-merge.
Opinions? Thoughts?
Thanks. Diego.
Attachment:
spec2000-i686.txt
Description: Text document
Attachment:
spec2000-x86_64.txt
Description: Text document
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |