[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] github
From: |
Christian Jullien |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] github |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Apr 2020 16:15:51 +0200 |
> Are there macOS images? Because if so, I could probably look at adding
> Mach-O support on a rainy day. Without access to MacOS that's going to be
> difficult :)
Wouah! I'd love to have it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=address@hidden] On
Behalf Of Michael Matz
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 16:05
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] github
Hello,
On Sun, 19 Apr 2020, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
>> TinyCC is great because it supports so much configurations (3 OSes, even
>> more CPU archs).
>>
>> But the downside is, that nobody can ensure that his change wont break
>> any of these configurations.
>> (Probably most of us are testing only on their own PC, which is one OS
>> with probably x86-64).
>>
>> How about a CI?
>
> I am not a core dev, but I set up a CI for tcc:
>
> https://gitlab.com/giomasce/tinycc/pipelines
>
> Unfortunately it is currently broken. I believe the CI is broken, not
> tcc, because it wasn't broken before my last round of CI script
> maintenance. I'll try to fix them as soon as I have some time, but if
> someone wants to check them out in the meantime I won't complain.
Yeah, I've seen the breakages, but had no bright idea, see below.
> Currently armhf fails with "Illegal instruction", and I don't know if
> the problem is QEMU emulation or tcc itself, because the same commit did
> work before I did my last round of changes.
Yeah, I figured something must be up with the emulator. No way TCC is
generating genuinely illegal instructions :) It would be helpful if the
emulator would give some hint of the instruction bytes it thinks are
illegal :) (One guess of mine was that the emulator is run in a mode
where e.g. Neon instructions are invalid?)
> riscv64 has a failing test, and that could be a genuine tcc bug. If so,
> it is probably introduced by recent "win32: long double as distinct
> C-type" commit. Broken test is "70_floating_point_literals", see the
> log[1].
Yeah, but I don't think there's a TCC problem. The failure in riscv64 is
random (i.e. changes place from test to test, when the pipelines are
re-triggered by unrelated changes, just browse the different fails). I've
looked at one of the testcases claimed to be failing and it's definitely
correct code.
> [1] https://gitlab.com/giomasce/tinycc/-/jobs/507946108
>
> As soon as I have some time, I'd like to fix these problems and
> eventually support Windows and macOS too. I believe this architecture
> with QEMU running in GitLab CI can work, but suitable Windows and macOS
> images have to be prepared and compilation scripts adapted. QEMU TCG
> emulation is slowish, but if we prepare images with a snapshot so that
> the VM doesn't have to go through the whole boot sequence it might be
> reasonable.
Are there macOS images? Because if so, I could probably look at adding
Mach-O support on a rainy day. Without access to MacOS that's going to be
difficult :)
Ciao,
Michael.
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel