| Message ID | 87mtmfx6x3.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [ping^3] Make sure that we get unique test names if several DejaGnu directives refer to the same line [PR102735] | expand |
Hi! ..., and here is another ping. Grüße Thomas On 2021-11-08T11:45:12+0100, I wrote: > Hi! > > Ping, once more. > > > Grüße > Thomas > > > On 2021-10-14T12:12:41+0200, I wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Ping, again. >> >> Commit log updated for <https://gcc.gnu.org/PR102735> >> "privatization-1-compute.c results in both XFAIL and PASS". >> >> >> Grüße >> Thomas >> >> >> On 2021-09-30T08:42:25+0200, I wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> Ping. >>> >>> On 2021-09-22T13:03:46+0200, I wrote: >>>> On 2021-09-19T11:35:00-0600, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>>>> A couple of goacc tests do not have unique names. >>>> >>>> Thanks for fixing this up, and sorry, largely my "fault", I suppose. ;-| >>>> >>>>> This causes problems >>>>> for the test comparison script when one of the test passes and the other >>>>> fails -- in this scenario the test comparison script claims there is a >>>>> regression. >>>> >>>> So I understand correctly that this is a problem not just for actual >>>> mixed PASS vs. FAIL (which we'd like you to report anyway!) that appear >>>> for the same line, but also for mixed PASS vs. XFAIL? (Because, the >>>> latter appears to be what you're addressing with your commit here.) >>>> >>>>> This slipped through for a while because I had turned off x86_64 testing >>>>> (others test it regularly and I was revamping the tester's hardware >>>>> requirements). Now that I've acquired more x86_64 resources and turned >>>>> on native x86 testing again, it's been flagged. >>>> >>>> (I don't follow that argument -- these test cases should be all generic? >>>> Anyway, not important, I guess.) >>>> >>>>> This patch just adds a numeric suffix to the TODO string to disambiguate >>>>> them. >>>> >>>> So, instead of doing this manually (always error-prone!), like you've... >>>> >>>>> Committed to the trunk, >>>> >>>>> commit f75b237254f32d5be32c9d9610983b777abea633 >>>>> Author: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> >>>>> Date: Sun Sep 19 13:31:32 2021 -0400 >>>>> >>>>> [committed] Make test names unique for a couple of goacc tests >>>> >>>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 >>>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 >>>>> @@ -39,9 +39,9 @@ contains >>>>> !$acc atomic write ! ... to force 'TREE_ADDRESSABLE'. >>>>> y = a >>>>> !$acc end parallel >>>>> - ! { dg-note {variable 'i' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>> - ! { dg-note {variable 'j' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>> - ! { dg-note {variable 'a' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>> + ! { dg-note {variable 'i' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO2" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>> + ! { dg-note {variable 'j' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO3" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>> + ! { dg-note {variable 'a' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO4" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>> >>>> ... etc. (also similarly in a handful of earlier commits, if I remember >>>> correctly), why don't we do that programmatically, like in the attached >>>> "Make sure that we get unique test names if several DejaGnu directives >>>> refer to the same line", once and for all? OK to push after proper >>>> testing? >>> >>> Attached again, for easy reference. >>> >>> I figure it may help if I showed an example of how this changes things; >>> for the test case cited above (word-diff): >>> >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 40+} (test for warnings, line 39) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 41+} (test for warnings, line 22) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 42+} (test for warnings, line 39) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 43+} (test for warnings, line 22) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 44+} (test for warnings, line 39) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 45+} (test for warnings, line 22) >>> XFAIL: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO2 {+at line 50+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>> XFAIL: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO3 {+at line 51+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>> XFAIL: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO4 {+at line 52+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO {+at line 53+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 54+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O (test for excess errors) >>> >>> Given that we now amend the 'comment' by 'at line $useline"', and given >>> that only ever one DejaGnu directive may appear on one source line, all >>> these output lines now must be unique. (If we wanted to, we again could >>> 's%TODO[0-9]+%TODO%', reverting your change cited above.) >>> >>> >>> Grüße >>> Thomas ----------------- Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht München, HRB 106955
From 347cce092ebd954d91046804c1d2b51b24eef68b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 12:42:41 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Make sure that we get unique test names if several DejaGnu directives refer to the same line [PR102735] gcc/testsuite/ PR testsuite/102735 * lib/gcc-dg.exp (process-message): Make sure that we get unique test names. --- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp | 14 ++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp index 7edd070d71d..78a6c3651ef 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp @@ -1191,8 +1191,18 @@ proc process-message { msgproc msgprefix dgargs } { upvar dg-messages dg-messages if { [llength $dgargs] == 5 } { - set num [get-absolute-line [lindex $dgargs 0] [lindex $dgargs 4]] - set dgargs [lreplace $dgargs 4 4 $num] + set useline [lindex $dgargs 0] + + # Resolve absolute line number. + set line [get-absolute-line $useline [lindex $dgargs 4]] + set dgargs [lreplace $dgargs 4 4 $line] + + if { $line != $useline } { + # Make sure that we get unique test names if different USELINEs + # refer to the same LINE. + set comment "[lindex $dgargs 2] at line $useline" + set dgargs [lreplace $dgargs 2 2 $comment] + } } # Process the dg- directive, including adding the regular expression -- 2.33.0