harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vladimir Ivanov" <ivavladi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm][smoke tests] Enabling smoke tests
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2006 13:11:57 GMT
On 12/12/06, Elena Semukhina <elena.semukhina@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Smoke tests look rather unstable today on SUSE 9 x86_64. They pass and
> fail
> alternately.



This failure also reproduced with different classlib test. Due to this issue
the CC is always failed on run of classlib tests over the DRLVM.
 Thanks, Vladimir

I observed a number of failures (io.Integers, jni.LoadLibrary, gc.List,
> gc.Free) with the same error message:
>
> Assertion failed: 0
> LIL INTERNAL ERROR: Not enough temporary registers
> java:
>
> /nfs/ins/proj/drl/coreapi/esemukhi/em64/drlvm/trunk/vm/port/src/lil/em64t/pim/lil_code_generator_em64t.cpp:204:
> LcgEM64TCodeGen::Tmp_GR_Opnd::Tmp_GR_Opnd(LcgEM64TContext&,
> LilInstructionContext*): Assertion `0' failed.
> log4cxx: No appender could be found for logger (port.old).
> log4cxx: Please initialize the log4cxx system properly.
>
> Elena
>
> geir
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Elena
> > >
> > > geir
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Elena Semukhina wrote:
> > >> > After a few days of runs I can conclude that almost 40 tests are
> > valid
> > >> and
> > >> > should be removed from the exclude lists. I've prepared a patch to
> > >> smoke
> > >> > tests: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2543
> > >> >
> > >> > After it is applied we'll have 3 stable issues:
> > >> > 1) gc.Mark craches on Windows
> > >> > 2) - 3)  stress.Stack and io.Integers will pass only on linux/JIT
> and
> > >> fail
> > >> > on other configurations because of StackOverflowError. Is it a
> known
> > >> issue?
> > >> >
> > >> > We'll also have four tests failing intermittently. I plan to play
> > with
> > >> them
> > >> > to get more details.
> > >> >
> > >> > All the above tests remain excluded.
> > >> >
> > >> > I prepared the update for ia32 platforms only because I don't have
> > >> > access to
> > >> > x86_64 machines for now. Hope to get it soon.
> > >> >
> > >> > I updated the http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/DRLVMInternalTestswith
> > >> new
> > >> > details.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > Elena
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On 12/7/06, Elena Semukhina <elena.semukhina@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 12/7/06, Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varlamov@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > 2006/12/6, Elena Semukhina <elena.semukhina@gmail.com>:
> > >> >> > > On 12/5/06, Rana Dasgupta <rdasgupt@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > How much total additional time would be needed
to run the
> > tests
> > >> >> that
> > >> >> > are
> > >> >> > > > excluded for "slowness" only?
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > There are 11 tests marked as slow. They run about 30
sec in
> JIT
> > >> mode.
> > >> >> > Only
> > >> >> > > one of them is rather slow: gc.Mark (~15 sec).
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > I compared the whole run duration on linux (JIT +
> interpreter).
> > >> >> > Currently 26
> > >> >> > > tests run for about 3 min 30 sec. Adding 42 tests from
exclude
> > >> list
> > >> >> > > increases duration up to 11 minutes (1 min 40 sec for
JIT).
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Is this time acceptable?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Probably yes.Exact timings depend on hardware used; I guess
the
> > >> >> > figures above are on a laptop?
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> No, 11 minutes are for multiprocessor machines (Windows/linux).
On
> a
> > >> >> single processor desktop the tests run for 24 minutes :(  Most
> > >> >> annoying is
> > >> >> the interpreter mode. We can agree later that some slow tests
> > >> should be
> > >> >> excluded for interpreter.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Anyway I need a couple of days to run the tests intensively to
> > reveal
> > >> all
> > >> >> unstable issues.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Elena
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Anyway let's try them over! Later if someone analyzed coverage,
we
> > can
> > >> >> > re-balance pre-commit and CI tests.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> > >> >> > > Elena
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> > >> >> > > > Rana
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > On 12/5/06, Elena Semukhina <elena.semukhina@gmail.com
>
> > wrote:
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > We currently have more than 40 smoke tests
in the exclude
> > >> list.
> > >> >> > > > > I tried to run all of them on linux/Windows
and found out
> > that
> > >> >> > most of
> > >> >> > > > > them
> > >> >> > > > > stably pass.
> > >> >> > > > > Those of them which have been marked with
the "slow"
> keyword
> > >> >> don't
> > >> >> > > > > actually
> > >> >> > > > > run slow. They are not slower than an average
smoke test.
> > Only
> > >> >> few
> > >> >> > of
> > >> >> > > > them
> > >> >> > > > > work about 10 seconds (comparing to 1-4 seconds
duration
> of
> > >> any
> > >> >> > other
> > >> >> > > > > test).
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > Only 3 tests stably fail and about 5 tests
fail
> > >> intermittently.
> > >> >> > I've
> > >> >> > > > added
> > >> >> > > > > the details to the
> > >> >> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/DRLVMInternalTestspage.
> > >> >> > > > > I plan to file JIRA issues about failing tests
and to
> gather
> > >> more
> > >> >> > > > > statictics
> > >> >> > > > > on intermittent failures.
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > Does anybody object to removing most tests
from exclude
> > lists
> > >> and
> > >> >> > bring
> > >> >> > > > > them
> > >> >> > > > > back to runs?
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > --
> > >> >> > > > > Thanks,
> > >> >> > > > > Elena
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > --
> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> > >> >> > > Elena
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >> Elena
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Elena
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message