On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 22:27 -0500, Adam Jensen wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 03:58:06 +0100 (CET)
> [email protected] wrote:
> > For FreeBSD, I'd like to see this issue fixed, but I don't really know
> > how to help.
> > 
> 
> I will start tinkering with the test-suite this evening. I've been
> thinking about writing a testing driver script that will launch
> [parallel][1] jobs and go through the entire test-suite, regardless of
> any particular failures, then assemble a nicely formatted report.

I also have an effort under way on this (which was superseded by some of
Tristan's commits last week) but think I have observed the same failure
(gcc build, Linux : Debian Jessie).

yes:
Test: 375
ghdl -a --std=93c vhdl-93/ashenden/compliant/ch_13_fg_13_26.vhd
vhdl-93/ashenden/compliant/ch_13_fg_13_26.vhd:33:20: port "a" already
associated in primary binding
and three similar offences.

I have a modified test script allowing the full set of (analyze / elab /
run / analyze_failure / elab_failure / run_failure) operations, and some
modified .exp scripts running tests that currently only analyze, but
didn't want to pollute the source tree with a half-baked known-faulty
test suite before 0.31 went out.

I'd like to pursue this further.

I ran into the test sequencing problem Tristan described, and a couple
of others and would like to make more progress before committing (and
breaking the testsuite in /default). Happy to share them privately, or
commit them then roll them back so they are accessible, if you want.

As Tristan says it's not too slow to run single-threaded (though with
gcc, more like 5-10 mins than 2 mins), and there are sequence
dependencies.

So if you wish to parallelise, I recommend doing so at the directory
level rather than at the file level : there will be no dependencies or
ordering there.

- Brian


_______________________________________________
Ghdl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss

Reply via email to