Re: [PATCH 5/8] gen-pert-test: parallel build support

[Doug Evans <xdje42 at gmail dot com>]

On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Doug Evans <dje@google.com> wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> This patch adds parallel build support for perf testcases.
>> To use the existing machinery, GDB_PARALLEL now contains
>> the subdirectory in which to put the parallel builds.
>>
>> 2015-07-20  Doug Evans  <dje@google.com>
>>
>>         * Makefile.in (check/%.exp): Pass directory for GDB_PARALLEL.
>>         (workers/%.worker, build-perf): New rule.
>>         (GDB_PERFTEST_MODE): New variable.
>>         (check-perf): Use it.
>>         (clean): Clean up gdb.perf parallel build subdirs.
>>         * lib/build-piece.exp: New file.
>>         * lib/cache.exp (gdb_do_cache): Include $GDB_PARALLEL in path name.
>>         * lib/gdb.exp (standard_output_file): Include $GDB_PARALLEL in path
>>         name.
>>         (standard_temp_file): Ditto.
>>         (GDB_PARALLEL handling): Make outputs,temp,cache directories as
>> subdirs
>>         of $GDB_PARALLEL.
>
> This patch seems to have caused a number of regressions:
>
> http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/Fedora-x86_64-m64/builds/1502
> http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/Fedora-x86_64-m32/builds/1501
> http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/Fedora-i686/builds/1510
>
> (possibly among others)
>
> Reverting this patch locally makes the regressions disappear for me,
> at least on x86_64-m64.

I can't repro this.
It's odd that this patch would cause these particular regressions:

http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/Fedora-x86_64-m32/builds/1501/steps/regressions/logs/regressions

http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/Fedora-x86_64-m64/builds/1502/steps/regressions/logs/regressions

Also, I don't understand this one:

http://gdb-build.sergiodj.net/builders/Debian-x86_64-m64/builds/1420

I can imagine makefile hacking for the perf tests breaking normal make check,
but then I'd expect the damage to be far more extensive, but the patch
reported in 1420 cannot have caused those regressions.