[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2] travis-ci: Disable C++ on Aarch64 container

From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] travis-ci: Disable C++ on Aarch64 container
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 11:20:39 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0

On 2/8/21 11:09 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 08/02/2021 10.16, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>> On 2/8/21 6:54 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 06/02/2021 21.05, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>>> Travis-CI seems to have enforced memory limit on containers,
>>>> and the 'GCC check-tcg' job started to fail [*]:
>>>>     [2041/3679] Compiling C++ object
>>>> libcommon.fa.p/disas_nanomips.cpp.o
>>>>     FAILED: libcommon.fa.p/disas_nanomips.cpp.o
>>>>     {standard input}: Assembler messages:
>>>>     {standard input}:577781: Warning: end of file not at end of a line;
>>>> newline inserted
>>>>     {standard input}:577882: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.lvl35769'
>>>>     {standard input}: Error: open CFI at the end of file; missing
>>>> .cfi_endproc directive
>>>>     c++: fatal error: Killed signal terminated program cc1plus
>>>>     compilation terminated.
>>> If disabling C++ "fixes" the issue, ok ...
>>> Otherwise, we should maybe rather limit the amount of parallel jobs
>>> there instead? (i.e. compiling with "make -j1" in the worst case?)
>> I exhausted my Travis-CI credits (frankly I don't plan to pay for it
>> with my own money).
> Yeah, same for me.
>> I'm happy with any patch (directly removing this job if it is not cared
>> of?) as long it silences the failure reports we get on IRC on each
>> merge.
> Ok, I wanted to send a PR with my other Travis->Gitlab patches today or
> tomorrow anyway, so I could also throw in your patch here to try to
> silence these failures (unless Alex wants to take this patch through his
> tree within the next days anyway)... then let's see whether disabling
> C++ is enough, and if not, we can still try my suggestion instead.

FYI there is a v3 (20210207121239.2288530-1-f4bug@amsat.org) fixing
how AArch64 is written:

OTOH we don't have any job explicitly disabling C++, right? (Not
sure we want one, just wondering).



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]