[Bug 1030250] New: gsl fails on a test with GCC 7 on i586
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250 Bug ID: 1030250 Summary: gsl fails on a test with GCC 7 on i586 Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Basesystem Assignee: bnc-team-screening@forge.provo.novell.com Reporter: martin.liska@suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:Staging:G... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250
Martin Liška
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250
Martin Liška
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250
Ludwig Nussel
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250#c1
Dominique Leuenberger
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250#c2
Adam Majer
Progressed to 'normal' staing by now:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:Staging:C... gsl/standard/i586
failing test suite
openSUSE:Factory:Staging:E has a newer gsl that passes test suite on i586 for a few days now. At the moment I'm working on fixing PPC ports where 2 unit tests are failing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1030250#c4
Adam Majer
[ 209s] ====================================== [ 209s] gsl 2.3: specfunc/test-suite.log [ 209s] ====================================== [ 209s] [ 209s] # TOTAL: 1 [ 209s] # PASS: 0 [ 209s] # SKIP: 0 [ 209s] # XFAIL: 0 [ 209s] # FAIL: 1 [ 209s] # XPASS: 0 [ 209s] # ERROR: 0 [ 209s] [ 209s] .. contents:: :depth: 2 [ 209s] [ 209s] FAIL: test [ 209s] ========== [ 209s] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [9186711] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [9187385] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [15218755] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [15219429] [ 209s] FAIL test (exit status: 1) [ 209s] [ 209s] ./specfunc/test.log [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [9186711] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [9187385] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=102 (-1.42436215874661529e-16 observed vs -1.42460074537287091e-16 expected) [15218755] [ 209s] FAIL: schmidt csphase=-1 deriv2 i=776 (1.85098628876862506e-16 observed vs 1.85127865747637551e-16 expected) [15219429] [ 209s] FAIL test (exit status: 1)
The expected deviance is <1e-10 for relative error and this is closer to 1e-4 Since GSL didn't change its code, there must be some change in GCC floating point optimization? Also, disabling optimization causes tests to fail in some other case :/ Michael, Richard, do you have any clues as to what changed in GCC that could result in this? There are no problems with any tests on x86_64. Disabling optimization causes failures in other tests due to error accumulation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply@novell.com