Add 'dg-note' next to 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed' (was: [PATCH] dumpfile.c: use prefixes other that 'note: ' for MSG_{OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS|MISSED_OPTIMIZATION})

Hi, again!

On 2018-09-25T16:00:14-0400, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
> As noted at Cauldron, dumpfile.c currently emits "note: " for all kinds
> of dump message, so that (after filtering) there's no distinction between
> MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS vs MSG_NOTE vs MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION in the
> textual output.
>
> This patch changes dumpfile.c so that the "note: " varies to show
> which MSG_* was used, with the string prefix matching that used for
> filtering in -fopt-info, hence e.g.
>   directive_unroll_3.f90:24:0: optimized: loop unrolled 7 times
> and:
>   pr19210-1.c:24:3: missed: missed loop optimization: niters analysis ends up with assumptions.

(However, 'MSG_NOTE'/'note: ' also still remains used for "general
optimization info".)

> The patch adds "dg-optimized" and "dg-missed" directives

> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp

> +# Handle output from -fopt-info for MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS:
> +# a successful optimization.
> +
> +proc dg-optimized { args } {
> +    # Make this variable available here and to the saved proc.
> +    upvar dg-messages dg-messages
> +
> +    process-message saved-dg-error "optimized: " "$args"
> +}
> +
> +# Handle output from -fopt-info for MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION:
> +# a missed optimization.
> +
> +proc dg-missed { args } {
> +    # Make this variable available here and to the saved proc.
> +    upvar dg-messages dg-messages
> +
> +    process-message saved-dg-error "missed: " "$args"
> +}
> +

Next to these, I'm proposing to add 'dg-note', see attached "[WIP] Add
'dg-note' next to 'dg-optimized'", which may be used instead of generic
'dg-message' (which in current uses in testcases often doesn't scan for
the 'note: ' prefix, by the way).

The proposed 'dg-note' has the additional property that "if dg-note is
used once, [notes] must *all* be handled explicitly".  The rationale is
that either you're not interested in notes at all (default behavior of
pruning all notes), but often, when you're interested in one note, you're
in fact interested in all notes, and especially interested if
*additional* notes appear over time, as GCC evolves.  It seemed somewhat
useful, but I'm not insisting on coupling the disabling of notes pruning
on 'dg-note' usage, so if anyone feels strongly about that, please speak
up.

TODO document (also 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed')

TODO 'gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp' change necessary/desirable?

The latter got added in commit 824721f0905478ebc39e6a295cc8e95c22fa9d17
"lto, testsuite: Fix ICE in -Wodr (PR lto/83121)".  David, do you happen
to have an opinion on that one?


Grüße
 Thomas


-----------------
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München / Germany
Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Alexander Walter

Hi!

Ping.


Grüße
 Thomas


On 2020-11-06T10:26:46+0100, I wrote:
> Hi, again!
>
> On 2018-09-25T16:00:14-0400, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
>> As noted at Cauldron, dumpfile.c currently emits "note: " for all kinds
>> of dump message, so that (after filtering) there's no distinction between
>> MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS vs MSG_NOTE vs MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION in the
>> textual output.
>>
>> This patch changes dumpfile.c so that the "note: " varies to show
>> which MSG_* was used, with the string prefix matching that used for
>> filtering in -fopt-info, hence e.g.
>>   directive_unroll_3.f90:24:0: optimized: loop unrolled 7 times
>> and:
>>   pr19210-1.c:24:3: missed: missed loop optimization: niters analysis ends up with assumptions.
>
> (However, 'MSG_NOTE'/'note: ' also still remains used for "general
> optimization info".)
>
>> The patch adds "dg-optimized" and "dg-missed" directives
>
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
>
>> +# Handle output from -fopt-info for MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS:
>> +# a successful optimization.
>> +
>> +proc dg-optimized { args } {
>> +    # Make this variable available here and to the saved proc.
>> +    upvar dg-messages dg-messages
>> +
>> +    process-message saved-dg-error "optimized: " "$args"
>> +}
>> +
>> +# Handle output from -fopt-info for MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION:
>> +# a missed optimization.
>> +
>> +proc dg-missed { args } {
>> +    # Make this variable available here and to the saved proc.
>> +    upvar dg-messages dg-messages
>> +
>> +    process-message saved-dg-error "missed: " "$args"
>> +}
>> +
>
> Next to these, I'm proposing to add 'dg-note', see attached "[WIP] Add
> 'dg-note' next to 'dg-optimized'", which may be used instead of generic
> 'dg-message' (which in current uses in testcases often doesn't scan for
> the 'note: ' prefix, by the way).
>
> The proposed 'dg-note' has the additional property that "if dg-note is
> used once, [notes] must *all* be handled explicitly".  The rationale is
> that either you're not interested in notes at all (default behavior of
> pruning all notes), but often, when you're interested in one note, you're
> in fact interested in all notes, and especially interested if
> *additional* notes appear over time, as GCC evolves.  It seemed somewhat
> useful, but I'm not insisting on coupling the disabling of notes pruning
> on 'dg-note' usage, so if anyone feels strongly about that, please speak
> up.
>
> TODO document (also 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed')
>
> TODO 'gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp' change necessary/desirable?
>
> The latter got added in commit 824721f0905478ebc39e6a295cc8e95c22fa9d17
> "lto, testsuite: Fix ICE in -Wodr (PR lto/83121)".  David, do you happen
> to have an opinion on that one?
>
>
> Grüße
>  Thomas
>
>
> From bb293fff7580025a3b78fc1619d8bf0d8f8b8a1a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:01:26 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] [WIP] Add 'dg-note' next to 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed'
>
> TODO document (also 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed')
>
> TODO 'gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp' change necessary/desirable?
> ---
>  .../gcc.dg/vect/nodump-vect-opt-info-2.c      |  4 ++-
>  gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp                  | 26 +++++++++++++++++++
>  gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp                     |  7 +++--
>  gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp                   |  7 +++--
>  4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/nodump-vect-opt-info-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/nodump-vect-opt-info-2.c
> index 23a3b39fbb32..bcdf7f076715 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/nodump-vect-opt-info-2.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/nodump-vect-opt-info-2.c
> @@ -3,7 +3,9 @@
>
>  extern void accumulate (int x, int *a);
>
> -int test_missing_function_defn (int *arr, int n) /* { dg-message "vectorized 0 loops in function" } */
> +int test_missing_function_defn (int *arr, int n) /* { dg-note "5: vectorized 0 loops in function" } */
> +/* { dg-prune-output "note: " } as we're not interested in matching any further
> +   notes.  */
>  {
>    int sum = 0;
>    for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) /* { dg-missed "21: couldn't vectorize loop" } */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> index 700529afbe25..c6ff07ab1376 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> @@ -1012,6 +1012,8 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
>           }
>           unset save_linenr_varnames
>       }
> +
> +     initialize_prune_notes
>      }
>
>      proc dg-test { args } {
> @@ -1245,6 +1247,30 @@ proc dg-missed { args } {
>      process-message saved-dg-warning "missed:" "$args"
>  }
>
> +# Handle output from -fopt-info for MSG_NOTE:
> +# a general optimization info.
> +# By default, such notes are pruned, but if dg-note is used once, they must all
> +# be handled explicitly.
> +
> +variable prune_notes
> +
> +proc initialize_prune_notes { } {
> +    global prune_notes
> +    set prune_notes 1
> +}
> +
> +initialize_prune_notes
> +
> +proc dg-note { args } {
> +    # Make this variable available here and to the saved proc.
> +    upvar dg-messages dg-messages
> +
> +    global prune_notes
> +    set prune_notes 0
> +
> +    process-message saved-dg-warning "note:" "$args"
> +}
> +
>  # Check the existence of a gdb in the path, and return true if there
>  # is one.
>  #
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp b/gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp
> index b2fa7ec8cecb..c9ed65ffc7cb 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp
> @@ -159,8 +159,11 @@ proc lto_prune_warns { text } {
>      regsub -all "(^|\n)\[ \t\]*\[\(\]file \[^\n\]* value=\[^\n\]*; file \[^\n\]* value=\[^\n\]*\[)\];" $text "" text
>      regsub -all "(^|\n)\[ \t\]*\[^\n\]* definition taken" $text "" text
>
> -    # Ignore informational notes.
> -    regsub -all "(^|\n)\[^\n\]*: note: \[^\n\]*" $text "" text
> +    global prune_notes
> +    if { $prune_notes } {
> +     # Ignore informational notes.
> +     regsub -all "(^|\n)\[^\n\]*: note: \[^\n\]*" $text "" text
> +    }
>
>      verbose "lto_prune_warns: exit: $text" 2
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp b/gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp
> index 190367c44e0f..ed7dec16fa1f 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/prune.exp
> @@ -50,8 +50,11 @@ proc prune_gcc_output { text } {
>      regsub -all "(^|\n)\[0-9\]\[0-9\]* errors\." $text "" text
>      regsub -all "(^|\n)(In file included|\[ \]+from)\[^\n\]*" $text "" text
>
> -    # Ignore informational notes.
> -    regsub -all "(^|\n)\[^\n\]*: note: \[^\n\]*" $text "" text
> +    global prune_notes
> +    if { $prune_notes } {
> +     # Ignore informational notes.
> +     regsub -all "(^|\n)\[^\n\]*: note: \[^\n\]*" $text "" text
> +    }
>
>      # Ignore harmless -fpic warnings.
>      regsub -all "(^|\n)\[^\n\]*: warning: -f(pic|PIC) ignored for target\[^\n\]*" $text "" text
> --
> 2.17.1
-----------------
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München / Germany
Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Alexander Walter

On 11/24/20 2:53 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Ping.
>
>
> Grüße
>  Thomas
>
>
> On 2020-11-06T10:26:46+0100, I wrote:
>> Hi, again!
>>
>> On 2018-09-25T16:00:14-0400, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> As noted at Cauldron, dumpfile.c currently emits "note: " for all kinds
>>> of dump message, so that (after filtering) there's no distinction between
>>> MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS vs MSG_NOTE vs MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION in the
>>> textual output.
>>>
>>> This patch changes dumpfile.c so that the "note: " varies to show
>>> which MSG_* was used, with the string prefix matching that used for
>>> filtering in -fopt-info, hence e.g.
>>>   directive_unroll_3.f90:24:0: optimized: loop unrolled 7 times
>>> and:
>>>   pr19210-1.c:24:3: missed: missed loop optimization: niters analysis ends up with assumptions.
>> (However, 'MSG_NOTE'/'note: ' also still remains used for "general
>> optimization info".)
>>
>>> The patch adds "dg-optimized" and "dg-missed" directives
>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
>>> +# Handle output from -fopt-info for MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS:
>>> +# a successful optimization.
>>> +
>>> +proc dg-optimized { args } {
>>> +    # Make this variable available here and to the saved proc.
>>> +    upvar dg-messages dg-messages
>>> +
>>> +    process-message saved-dg-error "optimized: " "$args"
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +# Handle output from -fopt-info for MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION:
>>> +# a missed optimization.
>>> +
>>> +proc dg-missed { args } {
>>> +    # Make this variable available here and to the saved proc.
>>> +    upvar dg-messages dg-messages
>>> +
>>> +    process-message saved-dg-error "missed: " "$args"
>>> +}
>>> +
>> Next to these, I'm proposing to add 'dg-note', see attached "[WIP] Add
>> 'dg-note' next to 'dg-optimized'", which may be used instead of generic
>> 'dg-message' (which in current uses in testcases often doesn't scan for
>> the 'note: ' prefix, by the way).
>>
>> The proposed 'dg-note' has the additional property that "if dg-note is
>> used once, [notes] must *all* be handled explicitly".  The rationale is
>> that either you're not interested in notes at all (default behavior of
>> pruning all notes), but often, when you're interested in one note, you're
>> in fact interested in all notes, and especially interested if
>> *additional* notes appear over time, as GCC evolves.  It seemed somewhat
>> useful, but I'm not insisting on coupling the disabling of notes pruning
>> on 'dg-note' usage, so if anyone feels strongly about that, please speak
>> up.
>>
>> TODO document (also 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed')
>>
>> TODO 'gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp' change necessary/desirable?
>>
>> The latter got added in commit 824721f0905478ebc39e6a295cc8e95c22fa9d17
>> "lto, testsuite: Fix ICE in -Wodr (PR lto/83121)".  David, do you happen
>> to have an opinion on that one?
>>
>>
>> Grüße
>>  Thomas
>>
>>
>> From bb293fff7580025a3b78fc1619d8bf0d8f8b8a1a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
>> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:01:26 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH] [WIP] Add 'dg-note' next to 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed'
>>
>> TODO document (also 'dg-optimized', 'dg-missed')
>>
>> TODO 'gcc/testsuite/lib/lto.exp' change necessary/desirable?
I think this is generally fine with the proper doc updates.  I wouldn't
think we'd want/need to treat LTO differently, so I'm not so sure about
that specific hunk.


Jeff