Use Ubuntu 20.04 images for SPARC64 and PPC64LE tests

[nmoinvaz]

I suspect that qemu or gcc or whatever must be buggy. See #1378 and #1379.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 83.23% // Head: 83.26% // Increases project coverage by +0.02% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (e4257c7) compared to base (31ce5ef).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1394      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    83.23%   83.26%   +0.02%     
===========================================
  Files          129      129              
  Lines        10745    10747       +2     
  Branches      2772     2772              
===========================================
+ Hits          8944     8948       +4     
  Misses        1118     1118              
+ Partials       683      681       -2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
macos_clang	41.88% <ø> (ø)
macos_gcc	73.15% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_clang	82.74% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_clang_debug	82.38% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_clang_inflate_allow_invalid_dist	82.20% <ø> (-0.19%)	⬇️
ubuntu_clang_inflate_strict	82.73% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_clang_mmap	82.87% <ø> (-0.19%)	⬇️
ubuntu_clang_pigz	13.65% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
ubuntu_clang_pigz_no_optim	10.92% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_clang_pigz_no_threads	13.58% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_clang_reduced_mem	83.23% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc	74.72% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_aarch64	77.07% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_aarch64_compat_no_opt	75.43% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
ubuntu_gcc_aarch64_no_acle	75.99% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_aarch64_no_neon	75.99% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_armhf	77.14% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_armhf_compat_no_opt	75.41% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_armhf_no_acle	77.13% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_armhf_no_neon	77.05% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_armsf	74.61% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_armsf_compat_no_opt	74.10% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_benchmark	73.39% <ø> (-0.17%)	⬇️
ubuntu_gcc_compat_no_opt	76.56% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_compat_sprefix	73.56% <ø> (+0.15%)	⬆️
ubuntu_gcc_m32	73.18% <ø> (+0.15%)	⬆️
ubuntu_gcc_mingw_i686	73.21% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_mingw_x86_64	73.40% <ø> (+0.15%)	⬆️
ubuntu_gcc_no_avx2	73.96% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_no_ctz	74.70% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_no_ctzll	74.72% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_no_pclmulqdq	73.84% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_no_sse2	74.12% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_no_sse4	73.77% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_o1	73.65% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
ubuntu_gcc_osb	∅ <ø> (∅)
ubuntu_gcc_pigz	38.30% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_pigz_aarch64	39.61% <ø> (+0.05%)	⬆️
ubuntu_gcc_ppc	73.69% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_ppc64	74.40% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_ppc64le	74.49% <ø> (?)
ubuntu_gcc_ppc_no_power8	74.57% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_s390x	74.80% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_s390x_dfltcc	71.78% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_s390x_dfltcc_compat	73.53% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_s390x_no_crc32	74.59% <ø> (ø)
ubuntu_gcc_sparc64	74.83% <ø> (?)
ubuntu_gcc_sprefix	73.08% <ø> (ø)
win64_gcc	73.69% <ø> (ø)
win64_gcc_compat_no_opt	74.78% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
gzlib.c	70.60% <0.00%> (ø)
arch/power/compare256_power9.c	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
arch/power/crc32_power8.c	99.60% <0.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
trees.c	92.26% <0.00%> (+0.24%)	⬆️
arch/x86/adler32_sse42.c	100.00% <0.00%> (+1.53%)	⬆️
adler32_p.h	100.00% <0.00%> (+3.57%)	⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[Dead2]

LGTM