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]

Re: RFC: Improving support for known testsuite failures


On Thu, 8 Sep 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:

> I think it would be more useful to have a script parse gcc-testresults@
> postings from the various autotesters and produce a nice webpage
> with revisions and known FAIL/XPASSes for the target triplets that
> are tested.

Better than parsing gcc-testresults might be a system for uploading full 
.sum files (or indeed .logs as well) to a database.  gcc-testresults is 
useful, but if a test isn't mentioned in a message you don't know if it 
passed or wasn't run at all, for example.  The database would be big by 
gcc.gnu.org standards (maybe multiple GB a day if all the gcc-testresults 
posters start uploading full .log files), but not by the standards of many 
modern web databases.  You'd want a contrib/ script for uploading files 
given metadata about the test run (some identifier for the tester, details 
of configuration and multilibs involved in the various files) that could 
be used for both build tree and installed testing.

(You might want to parse gcc-testresults *as well* for the additional logs 
found that way, but a system giving full logs and reliably identifying 
successive builds from the same tester could do more things, such as 
identifying regressions seen by any individual tester as opposed to a test 
that passes for one person on a given target and fails for another person 
on that target.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]