This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Need some Unix and /bin/sh expertise for GCC testsuite
- From: Laurent GUERBY <laurent at guerby dot net>
- To: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>
- Cc: gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>, Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 23:31:49 +0200
- Subject: Re: Need some Unix and /bin/sh expertise for GCC testsuite
- References: <1250283155.20287.116.camel@localhost> <20090814212503.GA1032@gmx.de>
- Reply-to: laurent at guerby dot net
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 23:25 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello,
>
> * Laurent GUERBY wrote on Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:52:35PM CEST:
> > => gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/run_all.sh
>
> > 3/ Here is the point I find surprising: the "ps fauxww" run in the
> > second "if" show that even if the script is fully sequential
> > at least one gnatmake subprocess (collect-ld) is still marked as running
> > *in parallel* with the ps command in the subsequent "if" of the script!
>
> One thing I see in that script is there is a line
> rm -rf $dir/tests.$$ &
>
> that will be run "in parallel" due to the stray "&".
This one is part of initialization done once well before the loop over
the tests, so I don't think it can interfere in any way (and my
"ps fauxww" log doesn't show it around).
> However, I also
> don't see at least parts of the rest of the script that you quote, so
> maybe I'm looking at the wrong version (looking at trunk) or you have
> added debug statements, so maybe yours has more such stray asynchronous
> lists.
Yes my quote is from my heavily instrumented run_all.sh.
The svn clean run_all.sh will exhibit the random fail with the very same
error message in gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/acats.log so the
instrumentation doesn't change the failure mode.
Thanks for your help,
Laurent