On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 at 18:56, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 29/06/18 10:45 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >On 29/06/18 09:39 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >>On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 at 09:21, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>On 29/06/18 08:55 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >>>>On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 at 18:23, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> The additions to <experimental/random> were added in 2015 but the new > >>>>> algorithms in <experimental/algorithm> were not. This adds them. > >>>>> > >>>>> * include/experimental/algorithm (sample, shuffle): Add new > >>>>> overloads > >>>>> using per-thread random number engine. > >>>>> * testsuite/experimental/algorithm/sample.cc: Simpify and reduce > >>>>> dependencies by using __gnu_test::test_container. > >>>>> * testsuite/experimental/algorithm/sample-2.cc: New. > >>>>> * testsuite/experimental/algorithm/shuffle.cc: New. > >>>>> > >>>>> Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk. > >>>>> > >>>>> This would be safe to backport, but nobody has noticed the algos are > >>>>> missing or complained, so it doesn't seem very important to backport. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>Hi, > >>>> > >>>>On bare-metal targets (aarch64 and arm + newlib), I've noticed that > >>>>the two new tests fail: > >>>>PASS: experimental/algorithm/shuffle.cc (test for excess errors) > >>>>spawn > >>>>/aci-gcc-fsf/builds/gcc-fsf-gccsrc/obj-arm-none-eabi/gcc3/utils/bin/qemu-wrapper.sh > >>>>./shuffle.exe > >>>>terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::runtime_error' > >>>> what(): random_device::random_device(const std::string&) > >>>> > >>>>*** EXIT code 4242 > >>>>FAIL: experimental/algorithm/shuffle.cc execution test > >>>> > >>>>PASS: experimental/algorithm/sample-2.cc (test for excess errors) > >>>>spawn > >>>>/aci-gcc-fsf/builds/gcc-fsf-gccsrc/obj-arm-none-eabi/gcc3/utils/bin/qemu-wrapper.sh > >>>>./sample-2.exe > >>>>terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::runtime_error' > >>>> what(): random_device::random_device(const std::string&) > >>>> > >>>>*** EXIT code 4242 > >>>>FAIL: experimental/algorithm/sample-2.cc execution test > >>>> > >>>>Does this ring a bell? > >>> > >>>Does the existing testsuite/experimental/random/randint.cc file fail > >>>in the same way? > >>> > >> > >>Yes it does. > >> > >>And so do: > >>25_algorithms/make_heap/complexity.cc > > > >This one also uses std::random_device. > > > >>23_containers/array/element_access/at_neg.cc > > > >Hmm, > > > > // Expected behavior is to either throw and have the uncaught > > // exception end up in a terminate handler which eventually exits, > > // or abort. (Depending on -fno-exceptions.) > > > >So this is expected to XFAIL. > > > >>26_numerics/random/random_device/cons/default.cc > > > >We should XFAIL the ones that use std::random_device, if we can > >identify an effective target to describe them. > > This adds a new "random_device" effective-target, so the tests are > disabled when the random_device isn't usable. > > Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk. If this works for > Christophe's bare metal targets I'll backport it to gcc-8-branch too. > Yes, that works for me: the tests are now UNSUPPORTED on aarch64*-elf and arm-none-eabi.
Thanks!
