From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#21620: tests/mpz/reuse intermittently fails on armhf-linux-gnu Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:27:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87k2qwtpk4.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87mvvxuxoo.fsf@gnu.org> <868u7gb1s5.fsf@shell.gmplib.org> <87d1wsm0jo.fsf@gnu.org> <87y4ffsa3y.fsf@netris.org> <87egh7b0p0.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3l6onje.fsf@netris.org> <87a8ru5sic.fsf@gnu.org> <20151008190754.GA6984@debian> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46110) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkT27-0001aq-B6 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2015 04:28:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkT22-0006M4-7k for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2015 04:28:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:44364) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkT22-0006Lf-44 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2015 04:28:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkT21-0004Pw-U4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2015 04:28:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20151008190754.GA6984@debian> (Andreas Enge's message of "Thu, 8 Oct 2015 21:07:54 +0200") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Andreas Enge Cc: 21620@debbugs.gnu.org, Andreas Enge Andreas Enge skribis: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 10:32:43PM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Do you think it=E2=80=99s a likely problem? Andreas, could you try agai= n on >> your Novena with 2 cores turned off? > > I have trouble believing the explanation of overheating. The gmp test > suite is carried out sequentially (they are not yet using the parallel > test harness of the autotools). So one could only imagine that the build > itself was faulty, but should then the test not fail consistently afterwa= rds? > If I understood correctly, you used one build and ran the same test > over and over again. On the other hand, since the machine also serves as a > build machine, it is possible that some other package was built at the sa= me > time as the tests were carried out, which may have contributed to heating. Yes. I think the only way to test the hypothesis is to turn off 2 processors and run that test in a loop again, and/or to do that on a different ARMv7 platform altogether. Ludo=E2=80=99.