Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CI: "spec test on nuttx" riscv job is failing frequently #3776

Open
yamt opened this issue Sep 9, 2024 · 12 comments
Open

CI: "spec test on nuttx" riscv job is failing frequently #3776

yamt opened this issue Sep 9, 2024 · 12 comments

Comments

@yamt
Copy link
Collaborator

yamt commented Sep 9, 2024

it's often "const" of "call_indirect" test failing it seems. but it doesn't seem very consistent.
failure logs i looked at were all ILP32F.

https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10764321632/job/29847058408

============> run const failed with a non-zero return code 101

Running: /__w/wasm-micro-runtime/wasm-micro-runtime/apps/interpreters/wamr/wamr/tests/wamr-test-suites/workspace/../../../wamr-compiler/build/wamrc --target=riscv32 --target-abi=ilp32f --cpu=generic-rv32 --cpu-features=+m,+a,+c,+f --disable-simd --disable-llvm-lto --bounds-checks=1 -o /tmp/tmppauwm0qx.aot /tmp/tmpp6zgci1d.wasm
Started with:
Create AoT compiler with:
  target:        riscv32
  target cpu:    generic-rv32
  target triple: riscv32-pc-linux-ilp32f
  cpu features:  +m,+a,+c,+f
  opt level:     3
  size level:    3
  output format: AoT file

Starting interpreter for module '/tmp/tmppauwm0qx.aot'
Running: qemu-system-riscv32 -semihosting -M virt,aclint=on -cpu rv32 -smp 1 -nographic -bios none -kernel /__w/wasm-micro-runtime/wasm-micro-runtime/nuttx/nuttx
Started with:
iwasm --heap-size=0 --repl --stack-size=1 /tmp/tmppauwm0qx.aot

Testing(return) f  = -1.797693e+308:f64
THE FINAL EXCEPTION IS Failed:
 Result 0 incorrect:
 expected: '-1.797693e+308:f64'
  got: '-inf:f64'

https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10755545345/job/29827427650

============> run call_indirect failed with a non-zero return code 101

https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10746972440/job/29808995646

============> run call_indirect failed with a non-zero return code 101

https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10730191223/job/29758313644

============> run call_indirect failed with a non-zero return code 101

https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10711568587/job/29710199664

============> run call_indirect failed with a non-zero return code 101

https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10692765583/job/29641885907

============> run call_indirect failed with a non-zero return code 101
@yamt yamt changed the title CI: CI: "spec test on nuttx" riscv job is failing frequently Sep 9, 2024
@yamt
Copy link
Collaborator Author

yamt commented Sep 9, 2024

@no1wudi any idea?

@lum1n0us
Copy link
Collaborator

lum1n0us commented Sep 9, 2024

I though @wenyongh is working on it too. #3771

@wenyongh
Copy link
Contributor

wenyongh commented Sep 9, 2024

I have no good idea yet, at first I think it may be caused by the timeout to wait for compiling wasm to aot is a little small, but it doesn't work even when I increases it. And it may report several errors:
(1) THE FINAL EXCEPTION IS compile wasm to aot failed
(2) THE FINAL EXCEPTION IS argument of type 'NoneType' is not iterable
(3)
Testing(return) f = -1.797693e+308:f64
THE FINAL EXCEPTION IS Failed:
Result 0 incorrect:
expected: '-1.797693e+308:f64'
got: '-inf:f64'

It fails frequently, I have to re-run it manually many times.

@lum1n0us
Copy link
Collaborator

lum1n0us commented Sep 9, 2024

🤔 I am thinking about "sequential" instead of "parallel" by removing -P from https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10764321632/workflow#L333

yamt added a commit to yamt/wasm-micro-runtime that referenced this issue Sep 9, 2024
@no1wudi
Copy link
Collaborator

no1wudi commented Sep 9, 2024

🤔 I am thinking about "sequential" instead of "parallel" by removing -P from https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10764321632/workflow#L333

Shutting down parallel testing may reduce or even prevent the problem from continuing to occur, but it may lead to excessively long testing times; perhaps we can give it a try.

@no1wudi
Copy link
Collaborator

no1wudi commented Sep 9, 2024

Speed of "sequential" test seems acceptable: #3780

Maybe we can try it fist

@wenyongh @lum1n0us @yamt

@yamt
Copy link
Collaborator Author

yamt commented Sep 9, 2024

Speed of "sequential" test seems acceptable: #3780

Maybe we can try it fist

@wenyongh @lum1n0us @yamt

it's still failing.
https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasm-micro-runtime/actions/runs/10775274630/job/29879549182

@wenyongh
Copy link
Contributor

How about re-opening #3777 and merging it?

@lum1n0us
Copy link
Collaborator

I agree. It has blocked several PRs.

yamt added a commit to yamt/wasm-micro-runtime that referenced this issue Sep 10, 2024
@yamt
Copy link
Collaborator Author

yamt commented Sep 10, 2024

How about re-opening #3777 and merging it?

re-opened and rebased.

wenyongh pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants