Thread
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Optimize vector8_has_le() on AArch64.
- f8f4afe751fc 19 (unreleased) cited
-
Properly fix AVX-512 CRC calculation bug
- 43da394304fb 18.0 cited
-
[buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> — 2025-11-26T06:07:50Z
Hi hackers, Sorry if it has already been discussed somewhere. While seeing the buildfarm, I found that recently regression test for modules sometimes failed [1]. Typical example is [2] and failed at simd.h. The issue happened over branches, and they use gcc experimental. Based on that I felt recent commits for gcc might be related with. I don't have enough knowledge around here, but I saw commits in gcc and listed Candidates [4], [5], [6]. Can you find something from here? Also, what should we do for nightly-built compilers? Will we fix tests or codes for them? [1]: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_failures.pl?max_days=3&stage=TestModulesCheck-C&filter=Submit [2]: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=leafhopper&dt=2025-11-25%2014%3A50%3A04&stg=testmodules-install-check-C [3]: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=1c9d321611367608d6bc1d97cf35b4c1bcb4b2d1 [4]: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=b24f73a8a5210b9877ae98112b0a87f2aeae0c62 [5]: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=2f7d90ef65c6f09106c18b99a9590b8f81933115 Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED
-
Re: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com> — 2025-11-26T08:00:06Z
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 1:08 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote: > While seeing the buildfarm, I found that recently regression test for modules > sometimes failed [1]. Typical example is [2] and failed at simd.h. > The issue happened over branches, and they use gcc experimental. Based on that > I felt recent commits for gcc might be related with. > > I don't have enough knowledge around here, but I saw commits in gcc and listed > Candidates [4], [5], [6]. Can you find something from here? We're not compiler engineers. > Also, what should we do for nightly-built compilers? Will we fix tests or codes for them? We might ask ourselves how often these have resulted in forward-looking fixes for our code, weighed against spurious failures and compiler bugs. -- John Naylor Amazon Web Services
-
Re: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2025-11-26T15:51:12Z
John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 1:08 PM Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) > <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> wrote: >> Also, what should we do for nightly-built compilers? Will we fix tests or codes for them? > We might ask ourselves how often these have resulted in > forward-looking fixes for our code, weighed against spurious failures > and compiler bugs. If a problem is being observed only on animals with experimental compilers, it's almost surely a compiler bug and not something we should spend time on. In this case, the failure is in test code that hasn't changed in several years, making it even less likely that we broke it. I'm not really thrilled that toolchains like these are being run as normal buildfarm animals. Even with the "experimental" annotation, there's too much chance that PG hackers will spend time analyzing issues that aren't ours. I do realize that there's value in this sort of testing, I just wish the results were more clearly identified as "probably not our problem". regards, tom lane
-
Re: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> — 2025-11-26T16:02:04Z
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 10:51:12AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > If a problem is being observed only on animals with experimental > compilers, it's almost surely a compiler bug and not something > we should spend time on. In this case, the failure is in test > code that hasn't changed in several years, making it even less > likely that we broke it. It looks like the failures are limited to AArch64, and commit f8f4afe did change the code in question a bit. However, there are failures on older PG versions where that commit was not applied, so the evidence does seem to point to a compiler bug. -- nathan
-
Re: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2025-11-26T16:10:31Z
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes: > It looks like the failures are limited to AArch64, and commit f8f4afe did > change the code in question a bit. However, there are failures on older > PG versions where that commit was not applied, so the evidence does seem to > point to a compiler bug. The present failures started much more recently than f8f4afe ... leafhopper, for example, was okay until about a day ago. Also, AFAICS f8f4afe was HEAD-only, but leafhopper is also failing in v18. (No evidence as yet about older branches.) Anyway, this is exactly the sort of analysis that we shouldn't be doing. regards, tom lane
-
Re: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> — 2025-11-26T16:21:58Z
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:10:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Anyway, this is exactly the sort of analysis that we shouldn't > be doing. Well, I wanted to be sure we weren't accidentally depending on undefined behavior, like what we fixed in commit 43da394. Something like that seemed within the realm of possibility. -- nathan
-
RE: [buildfarm related] Machines gcc experimental failed test_lfind
Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) <kuroda.hayato@fujitsu.com> — 2025-12-01T00:58:33Z
Dear John, Tom and Nathan, Thanks for seeing the issue. I found the animals are now green, e.g. [1], so I hope it might be a compiler's bug. I learned that no need to spend time for experimental tools unless we have idea around here. [1]: https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=snakefly&br=master Best regards, Hayato Kuroda FUJITSU LIMITED