Bug 31116 - gprofng test fails with "comparison of results in synprog failed" on x86_64-linux-gnu
Summary: gprofng test fails with "comparison of results in synprog failed" on x86_64-l...
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: binutils
Classification: Unclassified
Component: gprofng (show other bugs)
Version: 2.42
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Vladimir Mezentsev
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2023-12-06 09:16 UTC by Matthias Klose
Modified: 2024-02-27 17:48 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Last reconfirmed:


Attachments
test log (5.62 KB, text/x-log)
2023-12-06 09:16 UTC, Matthias Klose
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Matthias Klose 2023-12-06 09:16:58 UTC
Created attachment 15239 [details]
test log

this fails with trunk 20231206, attaching the test log.  There seems to be something wrong with the shell script. In the <builddir>/gprofng I see an unexpected file:

 ls builddir-single/gprofng/
'&1'            config.log        doc               gprofng.sum    Makefile   stamp-h1
 config.cache   config.status     gp-display-html   libcollector   site.exp   tmpdir
 config.h       development.exp   gprofng.log       libtool        src

$ cat builddir-single/gprofng/??
Error: Warning! Source file `tmpdir/setpath_map/src/t.c' is newer than the experiment data


                === gprofng tests ===

Schedule of variations:
    unix

Running target unix
Using /usr/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description file for target.
Using /usr/share/dejagnu/config/unix.exp as generic interface file for target.
Using /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/gprofng/testsuite/config/default.exp as tool-and-target-specific interface file.
### LD_LIBRARY_PATH: /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/builddir-single/gprofng/tmpdir/root/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gprofng:/home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/builddir-single/gprofng/tmpdir/root/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/gprofng/..
### GPROFNG_SYSCONFDIR: /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/builddir-single/gprofng/tmpdir/root/etc
### GPROFNG: /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/builddir-single/gprofng/tmpdir/root/usr/bin/gprofng
Running /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/gprofng/testsuite/gprofng.display/display.exp ...
ERROR: comparison of results in synprog failed
Running /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/gprofng/testsuite/gprofng.display/gp-archive.exp ...
Running /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/gprofng/testsuite/gprofng.display/gp-collect-app_F.exp ...
Running /home/packages/binutils/binutils-2.41.50.20231206/gprofng/testsuite/gprofng.display/setpath_map.exp ...

                === gprofng Summary ===

# of expected passes            4
# of unresolved testcases       1
# of unsupported tests          1
make[5]: *** [Makefile:924: check-small] Error 1
Comment 1 Vladimir Mezentsev 2023-12-13 03:35:55 UTC
What is an output of these commands ?
% cat tmpdir/synprog.-g-O0,-pon/display.log
% cat tmpdir/synprog.-g-O0,-pon/diff.out
% cat tmpdir/synprog.-g-O0,-pon/test.er/warnings.xml 


I think this is not a real problem in gprofng.
The test collects data in the current directory.
The test should probably collect data in /tmp.
Our tests may be sensitive to this.