| Message ID | yddzfrt6mjc.fsf@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | libstdc++: Introduce scale factor in 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc [PR98678] | expand |
On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 at 12:54, Rainer Orth <ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > > 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc consistently FAILs on Solaris/x86 > (both 32 and 64-bit): > > FAIL: 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc -std=gnu++17 execution test I see this one failing under x86_64-linux under high load. So I think we might simply want a better test. > > /vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc:95: int main(): Assertion 'wait_until_sys_min < (ready * 100)' failed. > wait_for(0s): 11892ns for 200 calls, avg 59.46ns per call > wait_until(system_clock minimum): 1304458ns for 200 calls, avg 6522.29ns per call > wait_until(steady_clock minimum): 1403221ns for 200 calls, avg 7016.1ns per call > wait_until(system_clock epoch): 3343806ns for 200 calls, avg 16719ns per call > wait_until(steady_clock epoch: 2959581ns for 200 calls, avg 14797.9ns per call > wait_for when ready: 10969ns for 200 calls, avg 54.845ns per call > > As reported in the PR, across a considerable range of CPUs the test > doesn't complete in the expected time. Therefore, this patch introduces > a Solaris/x86 specific scale factor to allow for that. > > There's no such issue on Solaris/SPARC, though. > > Tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and sparc-sun-solaris2.11. > > Ok for trunk? > > Rainer > > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University > > > 2024-06-04 Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> > > libstdc++-v3: > PR libstdc++/98678 > * testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc (main): Introduce > scale factor. >
# HG changeset patch # Parent 8f086e53ab093c8919708b1689a844446f2bc407 libstdc++: Introduce scale factor in 30_threads/future/members/poll.cc [PR98678] diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/future/members/poll.cc @@ -129,14 +129,21 @@ int main() VERIFY( wait_for_0 < (ready * 30) ); // Polling before ready using wait_until(min) should not be terribly slow. - VERIFY( wait_until_sys_min < (ready * 100) ); - VERIFY( wait_until_steady_min < (ready * 100) ); + // These tests consistently time out on a couple of targets, so provide + // scale factor. +#if defined(__sun) && defined(__svr4__) && (defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)) + double scale = 2.5; +#else + double scale = 1.0; +#endif + VERIFY( wait_until_sys_min < (ready * 100 * scale) ); + VERIFY( wait_until_steady_min < (ready * 100 * scale) ); // The following two tests fail with GCC 11, see // https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2020-November/051422.html #if 0 // Polling before ready using wait_until(epoch) should not be terribly slow. - VERIFY( wait_until_sys_epoch < (ready * 100) ); - VERIFY( wait_until_steady_epoch < (ready * 100) ); + VERIFY( wait_until_sys_epoch < (ready * 100 * scale) ); + VERIFY( wait_until_steady_epoch < (ready * 100 * scale) ); #endif }