random seed: 285592073
generated error fail pass / total time test name
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s Lin ref int test with Effect
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s Lin ref int test with Effect (generating)
[✓] 20000 0 0 20000 / 20000 0.3s Lin ref int test with Effect
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s Lin ref int64 test with Effect
[✓] 20000 0 0 20000 / 20000 0.3s Lin ref int64 test with Effect
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s Lin CList int test with Effect
[✓] 20000 0 0 20000 / 20000 0.4s Lin CList int test with Effect
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s Lin CList int64 test with Effect
[✓] 20000 0 0 20000 / 20000 0.5s Lin CList int64 test with Effect
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s negative Lin ref int test with Effect
[✓] 1 0 1 0 / 20000 0.0s negative Lin ref int test with Effect
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s negative Lin ref int64 test with Effect
[✓] 1 0 1 0 / 20000 0.0s negative Lin ref int64 test with Effect
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s negative Lin CList int test with Effect
[✓] 1 0 1 0 / 20000 0.0s negative Lin CList int test with Effect
File "src/neg_tests/dune", line 92, characters 7-23:
92 | (name lin_tests_effect)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(cd _build/default/src/neg_tests && ./lin_tests_effect.exe --verbose)
Command got signal SEGV.
[ ] 0 0 0 0 / 20000 0.0s negative Lin CList int64 test with Effect
Note: I pushed an update to add a CHANGES entry to the PR underway, which triggers a cancellation of ongoing and queued jobs. I'm unsure whether that caused it (is it implemented as a signal?) or whether this is reproducible locally... :thinking:
I just recalled that https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/12535 was not included in the September 5.1.0 release.
I also confirmed locally: it is indeed reproducible on 5.1.0 but not on trunk.
In the first CI run for #415 we triggered a segfault in the 5.1 framepointer mode: https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/multicoretests/actions/runs/6956703096/job/18928093937#logs
Note: I pushed an update to add a
CHANGES
entry to the PR underway, which triggers a cancellation of ongoing and queued jobs. I'm unsure whether that caused it (is it implemented as a signal?) or whether this is reproducible locally... :thinking: