[PATCH] microblaze: microblaze.md: Use 'SI' instead of 'VOID' for operand 1 of 'call_value_intern'

[Chen Gang]

OK, thanks, next month, I shall try Qemu for microblaze (I also focus on Qemu, and try to make patches for it).
And, I also need finish the testsuite under Darwin x86_64, next month for gcc.

I finish tried testsuit under Darwin x86_64, originally, I incorrectly
installed mpc: need "brew install libmpc", not "brew install mpc", and
also need "brew link libmpc" which I missed.

At present, except for libjave Throw_2.exe test, I guess all others are
OK, please help check the result below, thanks.

If it passes checking, next, I shall try to fix libjava Throw_2 issue
within this month (others, include Throw_1 and Throw_3 are all OK).

=== g++ Summary ===

# of expected passes 82961
# of unexpected failures 891
# of expected failures 255
# of unresolved testcases 272
# of unsupported tests 3421

=== gcc Summary ===

# of expected passes 85011
# of unexpected failures 30
# of expected failures 182
# of unresolved testcases 10
# of unsupported tests 2796

=== gfortran Summary ===

# of expected passes 46354
# of unexpected failures 1
# of expected failures 38
# of unsupported tests 74

=== gnat Summary ===

# of expected passes 799
# of unexpected failures 67
# of unexpected successes 18
# of unresolved testcases 382
# of unsupported tests 8

=== objc Summary ===

# of expected passes 5828
# of unexpected failures 4
# of expected failures 6
# of unsupported tests 77

=== boehm-gc Summary ===

# of expected passes 12
# of unsupported tests 1

=== libatomic Summary ===

# of expected passes 54

=== libffi Summary ===

# of expected passes 1819
# of unsupported tests 55

=== libgomp Summary ===

# of expected passes 3194
# of unsupported tests 38

=== libitm Summary ===

# of expected passes 26
# of expected failures 3
# of unsupported tests 1

=== libjava Summary ===

# of expected passes 2574
# of unexpected failures 4 /* The 4 issues are all related with Throw_2.exe */
# of expected failures 4
# of untested testcases 4

=== libstdc++ Summary ===

# of expected passes 8956
# of unexpected failures 159
# of expected failures 69
# of unresolved testcases 38
# of unsupported tests 670


Thanks.

[Chen Gang]

Post by Chen Gang

OK, thanks, next month, I shall try Qemu for microblaze (I also focus on Qemu, and try to make patches for it).
And, I also need finish the testsuite under Darwin x86_64, next month for gcc.

I finish tried testsuit under Darwin x86_64, originally, I incorrectly
installed mpc: need "brew install libmpc", not "brew install mpc", and
also need "brew link libmpc" which I missed.
At present, except for libjave Throw_2.exe test, I guess all others are
OK, please help check the result below, thanks.

Oh, sorry, I forgot to mention 2 things:

- config with "--disable-multilibs", and I shall try normal configiure
again (although I guess, it will also be OK), hope I can finish
within 2 days.

- And during test libjava, it will quit with error because of Throw_2,
so I modified the related Makefile to skip it.

Post by Chen Gang
If it passes checking, next, I shall try to fix libjava Throw_2 issue
within this month (others, include Throw_1 and Throw_3 are all OK).
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 82961
# of unexpected failures 891
# of expected failures 255
# of unresolved testcases 272
# of unsupported tests 3421
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 85011
# of unexpected failures 30
# of expected failures 182
# of unresolved testcases 10
# of unsupported tests 2796
=== gfortran Summary ===
# of expected passes 46354
# of unexpected failures 1
# of expected failures 38
# of unsupported tests 74
=== gnat Summary ===
# of expected passes 799
# of unexpected failures 67
# of unexpected successes 18
# of unresolved testcases 382
# of unsupported tests 8
=== objc Summary ===
# of expected passes 5828
# of unexpected failures 4
# of expected failures 6
# of unsupported tests 77
=== boehm-gc Summary ===
# of expected passes 12
# of unsupported tests 1
=== libatomic Summary ===
# of expected passes 54
=== libffi Summary ===
# of expected passes 1819
# of unsupported tests 55
=== libgomp Summary ===
# of expected passes 3194
# of unsupported tests 38
=== libitm Summary ===
# of expected passes 26
# of expected failures 3
# of unsupported tests 1
=== libjava Summary ===
# of expected passes 2574
# of unexpected failures 4 /* The 4 issues are all related with Throw_2.exe */
# of expected failures 4
# of untested testcases 4
=== libstdc++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 8956
# of unexpected failures 159
# of expected failures 69
# of unresolved testcases 38
# of unsupported tests 670
Thanks.

[Chen Gang]

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Chen Gang

OK, thanks, next month, I shall try Qemu for microblaze (I also focus on Qemu, and try to make patches for it).
And, I also need finish the testsuite under Darwin x86_64, next month for gcc.

I finish tried testsuit under Darwin x86_64, originally, I incorrectly
installed mpc: need "brew install libmpc", not "brew install mpc", and
also need "brew link libmpc" which I missed.
At present, except for libjave Throw_2.exe test, I guess all others are
OK, please help check the result below, thanks.

- config with "--disable-multilibs", and I shall try normal configiure
again (although I guess, it will also be OK), hope I can finish
within 2 days.
- And during test libjava, it will quit with error because of Throw_2,
so I modified the related Makefile to skip it.

After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.

If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.


Thanks.

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Chen Gang
If it passes checking, next, I shall try to fix libjava Throw_2 issue
within this month (others, include Throw_1 and Throw_3 are all OK).
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 82961
# of unexpected failures 891
# of expected failures 255
# of unresolved testcases 272
# of unsupported tests 3421
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 85011
# of unexpected failures 30
# of expected failures 182
# of unresolved testcases 10
# of unsupported tests 2796
=== gfortran Summary ===
# of expected passes 46354
# of unexpected failures 1
# of expected failures 38
# of unsupported tests 74
=== gnat Summary ===
# of expected passes 799
# of unexpected failures 67
# of unexpected successes 18
# of unresolved testcases 382
# of unsupported tests 8
=== objc Summary ===
# of expected passes 5828
# of unexpected failures 4
# of expected failures 6
# of unsupported tests 77
=== boehm-gc Summary ===
# of expected passes 12
# of unsupported tests 1
=== libatomic Summary ===
# of expected passes 54
=== libffi Summary ===
# of expected passes 1819
# of unsupported tests 55
=== libgomp Summary ===
# of expected passes 3194
# of unsupported tests 38
=== libitm Summary ===
# of expected passes 26
# of expected failures 3
# of unsupported tests 1
=== libjava Summary ===
# of expected passes 2574
# of unexpected failures 4 /* The 4 issues are all related with Throw_2.exe */
# of expected failures 4
# of untested testcases 4
=== libstdc++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 8956
# of unexpected failures 159
# of expected failures 69
# of unresolved testcases 38
# of unsupported tests 670
Thanks.

[Andrew Haley]

Post by Chen Gang
After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.
If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.

Throw_2 is a test specially contrived to detect segfaults that are
not being correctly detected and turned into NullPointerException()s.
A failure indicates that the segfault signal handler is broken.

Andrew.

[Chen Gang]

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.
If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.

Throw_2 is a test specially contrived to detect segfaults that are
not being correctly detected and turned into NullPointerException()s.
A failure indicates that the segfault signal handler is broken.

OK, thank, at present, it passes compiling (can generate 'Throw_2.exe'),
and after run it without any parameters, "1" is printed, but "2" is not
printed.

Under Fedora 20 x86_64, the same gcc code, it is OK ("2" can be printed),
but under Darwin x86_64, it is "Abort trap: 6" instead of. The related
code: "try{Double.parseDouble(str());}catch", and "str(){return null;}".

And I shall continue to try to analyze it (within this month), and
welcome any additional ideas, suggestions, and completion for it,


Thanks

[Andrew Haley]

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.
If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.

Throw_2 is a test specially contrived to detect segfaults that are
not being correctly detected and turned into NullPointerException()s.
A failure indicates that the segfault signal handler is broken.

OK, thank, at present, it passes compiling (can generate 'Throw_2.exe'),
and after run it without any parameters, "1" is printed, but "2" is not
printed.
Under Fedora 20 x86_64, the same gcc code, it is OK ("2" can be printed),
but under Darwin x86_64, it is "Abort trap: 6" instead of. The related
code: "try{Double.parseDouble(str());}catch", and "str(){return null;}".
And I shall continue to try to analyze it (within this month), and
welcome any additional ideas, suggestions, and completion for it,

Not every platform supports unwinding through signal handlers. In x86
Linux there is some very clever code which interacts with the kernel to
allow this.

Andrew.

[Chen Gang]

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.
If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.

Throw_2 is a test specially contrived to detect segfaults that are
not being correctly detected and turned into NullPointerException()s.
A failure indicates that the segfault signal handler is broken.

OK, thank, at present, it passes compiling (can generate 'Throw_2.exe'),
and after run it without any parameters, "1" is printed, but "2" is not
printed.
Under Fedora 20 x86_64, the same gcc code, it is OK ("2" can be printed),
but under Darwin x86_64, it is "Abort trap: 6" instead of. The related
code: "try{Double.parseDouble(str());}catch", and "str(){return null;}".
And I shall continue to try to analyze it (within this month), and
welcome any additional ideas, suggestions, and completion for it,

Not every platform supports unwinding through signal handlers. In x86
Linux there is some very clever code which interacts with the kernel to
allow this.

Excuse me, I am not quite familiar with Java, I guess what you said is:

- The related feature need OS kernel support, if OS kernel does not
support, it may report "Abort trap: 6" or others.

- And OS kernel has feature to support "1" printed does not mean it
also has feature to support "2" printed.

- And I need try to make sure that my current Darwin kernel whether
supports it or not.

If what I guess is incorrect, please let me know, thanks.

For me, whether Darwin kernel supports or not, we have to improve
current implementation (may be testsuite configure or Makefile) to
avoid testsuite breaking.


Thanks.

[Andrew Haley]

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.
If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.

Throw_2 is a test specially contrived to detect segfaults that are
not being correctly detected and turned into NullPointerException()s.
A failure indicates that the segfault signal handler is broken.

OK, thank, at present, it passes compiling (can generate 'Throw_2.exe'),
and after run it without any parameters, "1" is printed, but "2" is not
printed.
Under Fedora 20 x86_64, the same gcc code, it is OK ("2" can be printed),
but under Darwin x86_64, it is "Abort trap: 6" instead of. The related
code: "try{Double.parseDouble(str());}catch", and "str(){return null;}".
And I shall continue to try to analyze it (within this month), and
welcome any additional ideas, suggestions, and completion for it,

Not every platform supports unwinding through signal handlers. In x86
Linux there is some very clever code which interacts with the kernel to
allow this.

- The related feature need OS kernel support, if OS kernel does not
support, it may report "Abort trap: 6" or others.
- And OS kernel has feature to support "1" printed does not mean it
also has feature to support "2" printed.
- And I need try to make sure that my current Darwin kernel whether
supports it or not.
If what I guess is incorrect, please let me know, thanks.

That sounds approximately right, but it's changed a lot since I last
looked. It may be that the magic is in glibc rather than the kernel.

Post by Chen Gang
For me, whether Darwin kernel supports or not, we have to improve
current implementation (may be testsuite configure or Makefile) to
avoid testsuite breaking.

The testsuite isn't breaking: it's telling you something useful.

Andrew.

[Chen Gang]

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.
If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.

Throw_2 is a test specially contrived to detect segfaults that are
not being correctly detected and turned into NullPointerException()s.
A failure indicates that the segfault signal handler is broken.

OK, thank, at present, it passes compiling (can generate 'Throw_2.exe'),
and after run it without any parameters, "1" is printed, but "2" is not
printed.
Under Fedora 20 x86_64, the same gcc code, it is OK ("2" can be printed),
but under Darwin x86_64, it is "Abort trap: 6" instead of. The related
code: "try{Double.parseDouble(str());}catch", and "str(){return null;}".
And I shall continue to try to analyze it (within this month), and
welcome any additional ideas, suggestions, and completion for it,

Not every platform supports unwinding through signal handlers. In x86
Linux there is some very clever code which interacts with the kernel to
allow this.

- The related feature need OS kernel support, if OS kernel does not
support, it may report "Abort trap: 6" or others.
- And OS kernel has feature to support "1" printed does not mean it
also has feature to support "2" printed.
- And I need try to make sure that my current Darwin kernel whether
supports it or not.
If what I guess is incorrect, please let me know, thanks.

That sounds approximately right, but it's changed a lot since I last
looked. It may be that the magic is in glibc rather than the kernel.

OK, thanks, I shall also notice about glibc when I try to analyze it,
e.g. need try to build and install upstream glibc instead of the Darwin
glibc (I am not quite sure whether I can do that, I guess I can).

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
For me, whether Darwin kernel supports or not, we have to improve
current implementation (may be testsuite configure or Makefile) to
avoid testsuite breaking.

The testsuite isn't breaking: it's telling you something useful.

Sorry it is breaked, at present, I temporarily skipped it and then can
let "make check" finish, the related temporarily skip diff may like
below (in real action, I modify the related Makefile, directly):

diff --git a/libjava/testsuite/Makefile.in b/libjava/testsuite/Makefile.in
index 28fc102..d1e77de 100644
--- a/libjava/testsuite/Makefile.in
+++ b/libjava/testsuite/Makefile.in
@@ -390,7 +390,7 @@ check-DEJAGNU: site.exp
if $(SHELL) -c "$$runtest --version" > /dev/null 2>&1; then \
exit_status=0; l='$(DEJATOOL)'; for tool in $$l; do \
if $$runtest $(AM_RUNTESTFLAGS) $(RUNTESTDEFAULTFLAGS) $(RUNTESTFLAGS); \
- then :; else exit_status=1; fi; \
+ then :; else exit_status=0; fi; \
done; \
else echo "WARNING: could not find \`runtest'" 1>&2; :;\
fi; \
ba

Thanks.

[Andrew Haley]

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
After try normal configure, get almost the same result, I guess, our
testsuite under Darwin x86_64 is OK.
If no any additional reply within a week, I shall continue to try to
analyze the libjava Throw_2 issue.

Throw_2 is a test specially contrived to detect segfaults that are
not being correctly detected and turned into NullPointerException()s.
A failure indicates that the segfault signal handler is broken.

OK, thank, at present, it passes compiling (can generate 'Throw_2.exe'),
and after run it without any parameters, "1" is printed, but "2" is not
printed.
Under Fedora 20 x86_64, the same gcc code, it is OK ("2" can be printed),
but under Darwin x86_64, it is "Abort trap: 6" instead of. The related
code: "try{Double.parseDouble(str());}catch", and "str(){return null;}".
And I shall continue to try to analyze it (within this month), and
welcome any additional ideas, suggestions, and completion for it,

Not every platform supports unwinding through signal handlers. In x86
Linux there is some very clever code which interacts with the kernel to
allow this.

- The related feature need OS kernel support, if OS kernel does not
support, it may report "Abort trap: 6" or others.
- And OS kernel has feature to support "1" printed does not mean it
also has feature to support "2" printed.
- And I need try to make sure that my current Darwin kernel whether
supports it or not.
If what I guess is incorrect, please let me know, thanks.

That sounds approximately right, but it's changed a lot since I last
looked. It may be that the magic is in glibc rather than the kernel.

OK, thanks, I shall also notice about glibc when I try to analyze it,
e.g. need try to build and install upstream glibc instead of the Darwin
glibc (I am not quite sure whether I can do that, I guess I can).

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang
For me, whether Darwin kernel supports or not, we have to improve
current implementation (may be testsuite configure or Makefile) to
avoid testsuite breaking.

The testsuite isn't breaking: it's telling you something useful.

Sorry it is breaked, at present, I temporarily skipped it and then can
let "make check" finish, the related temporarily skip diff may like

You're missing what I'm saying. The testuite is not broken.

You should be running "make -k check".

Andrew.

[Chen Gang]

[...]

Post by Andrew Haley

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Andrew Haley
The testsuite isn't breaking: it's telling you something useful.

Sorry it is breaked, at present, I temporarily skipped it and then can
let "make check" finish, the related temporarily skip diff may like

You're missing what I'm saying. The testuite is not broken.
You should be running "make -k check".

For me, "make -k check" is suitable for one sub-system (e.g. for cross
building, and mainly focus on gcc), but not for global check (full
non-cross building check):

- "make check" is the standard check for global, so when find new
issues (include environment construction), need stop in time.

- If one sub-system wants to skip the known issue, it can mark it as
'unexpected', or just simply return 0 to Makefile to let checking
continue (I guess, most of other sub-system do in this way).

- Or for other members (especially for newbies, e.g. me), he/she can
not sure whether the environment construction for testsuite is OK or
not:

e.g. For our case, after build upstream glibc and let testsuite use
it instead of Darwin glibc, all things may go OK. If really it is,
it is environments construction (not testsuite or code) issue.


Thanks.

[Mike Stump]

Post by Chen Gang
For me, "make -k check" is suitable for one sub-system (e.g. for cross
building, and mainly focus on gcc), but not for global check (full

In our world, there is no sub-system, so, talk of such is outside the scope of gcc.

Let me repeat what he said differently.

You have two choices, fixing the port so that there are no unexpected failures or running check with -k.

I’d like to get to the point where all primary/secondary platforms can use make check directly, we’re not there yet.

The idea is that the single return value tells if if the suite passed or not. This is an absolute measure, that, when achieved means one never has to compare previous/present results, just know that the suite passed. Sometimes simple is better.

Post by Chen Gang
- "make check" is the standard check for global,

No sub-system, no global.

[Chen Gang]

Post by Mike Stump

Post by Chen Gang
For me, "make -k check" is suitable for one sub-system (e.g. for cross
building, and mainly focus on gcc), but not for global check (full

In our world, there is no sub-system, so, talk of such is outside the scope of gcc.
Let me repeat what he said differently.
You have two choices, fixing the port so that there are no unexpected failures or running check with -k.
I’d like to get to the point where all primary/secondary platforms can use make check directly, we’re not there yet.
The idea is that the single return value tells if if the suite passed or not. This is an absolute measure, that, when achieved means one never has to compare previous/present results, just know that the suite passed. Sometimes simple is better.

Post by Chen Gang
- "make check" is the standard check for global,

No sub-system, no global.

Theoretically, in each system (include gcc), always can be separated
into several 'sub-systems', and then 'global' means the system itself.

In our case, we say let 'global' pass checking means let gcc, gfortran,
g++, libjava ... all pass checking. But for mainly focus on constructing
environments, I will try to use upstream glibc instead of Darwin glibc:

- If fix Throw_2, we know it is environments construction issue.

- Else, I shall skip it (since "make -k check" should be OK).

And after finish testsuite under Darwin, within this month, I shall try
to find and send a patch for gcc, and pass testsuite under Darwin (it
seems it is not quite difficult to me).


Thanks

[Chen Gang]

Post by Chen Gang

Post by Mike Stump

Post by Chen Gang
For me, "make -k check" is suitable for one sub-system (e.g. for cross
building, and mainly focus on gcc), but not for global check (full

In our world, there is no sub-system, so, talk of such is outside the scope of gcc.
Let me repeat what he said differently.
You have two choices, fixing the port so that there are no unexpected failures or running check with -k.
I’d like to get to the point where all primary/secondary platforms can use make check directly, we’re not there yet.
The idea is that the single return value tells if if the suite passed or not. This is an absolute measure, that, when achieved means one never has to compare previous/present results, just know that the suite passed. Sometimes simple is better.

Post by Chen Gang
- "make check" is the standard check for global,

No sub-system, no global.

Theoretically, in each system (include gcc), always can be separated
into several 'sub-systems', and then 'global' means the system itself.
In our case, we say let 'global' pass checking means let gcc, gfortran,
g++, libjava ... all pass checking. But for mainly focus on constructing
- If fix Throw_2, we know it is environments construction issue.
- Else, I shall skip it (since "make -k check" should be OK).
And after finish testsuite under Darwin, within this month, I shall try
to find and send a patch for gcc, and pass testsuite under Darwin (it
seems it is not quite difficult to me).

It is really unlucky, The upstream glibc does not support Darwin! And
sorry, send patches to glibc is really out of my current border, so I
have to give up. :-(

bash-3.2# ../glibc/configure --with-prefix=/release/Darwin/ --with-sysroot=/release/Darwin
checking build system type... x86_64-apple-darwin13.4.0
checking host system type... x86_64-apple-darwin13.4.0
checking for gcc... gcc
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for g++... g++
checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes
checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes
checking for readelf... no
checking for sysdeps preconfigure fragments... aarch64 alpha arm hppa i386 m68k microblaze mips powerpc s390 sh sparc tile x86_64 checking whether gcc compiles in -mx32 mode by default... no

configure: running configure fragment for add-on libidn
*** The GNU C library is currently not available for this platform.
*** So far nobody cared to port it and if there is no volunteer it
*** might never happen. So, if you have interest to see glibc on
*** this platform visit
*** http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/porting.html
*** and join the group of porters


And I guess, this thread can be ended, and next, I shall try to find a
patch for gcc, and let it pass testsuite under Darwin.


Thanks.