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] |