Re: [PATCH] testsuite: fix scan-tree-dump patterns [PR83904, PR100297]

[Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>]

On 4/19/23 17:14, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2023 at 03:03, Jerry D via Fortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/18/23 12:39 PM, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> the attached patch adjusts the scan-tree-dump patterns of the
>>> reported testcases which likely were run in a location such
>>> that a path in an error message showing in the tree-dump might
>>> have accidentally matched "free" or "data", respectively.
>>>
>>> For the testcase gfortran.dg/reshape_8.f90 I checked with a
>>> failing gfortran-11 that the pattern is appropriate.
>>>
>>> OK for mainline?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Harald
>>>
>> Yes, OK
>
> I'm certainly not opposed to this specific incarnation of such a fix.
> These failures are really unpleasant :)
> As proposed in https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20220426010029.2b476337@nbbrfq/
> we could add a -fno-file to suppress the assembler .file output
> (whatever the prefix looks like depends on the assembler dialect). Or
> we could nuke the .file directives by a sed(1), but that would
> probably be cumbersome for remote targets. I don't have a better idea
> than -fno-file or -ffile=foo.c .
> Fixing them case-by-case does not scale all that well IMHO.
>
> Thoughts?
>

?

It wasn't the tree-dumps being at fault, it was the scan patterns.