[Bug c++/100412] New: [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[Bug c++/100412] New: [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100412

            Bug ID: 100412
           Summary: [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test
                    aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

contrig/test_summary on Arm and AArch64 shows both PASS and FAIL with the same
summary line.  

Tests that now fail, but worked before (6 tests):

aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 40)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 42)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 44)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 46)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-3.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 35)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-3.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 39)

Tests that now work, but didn't before (6 tests):

aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 40)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 42)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 44)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-2.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 46)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-3.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 35)
aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-3.c pr????? (test for warnings, line 39)

It looks like these tests really do have two tests that try to refer to the
same line (one of which is an XFAIL), but this breaks the summary reporter.

Is there a way of reworking this test to remove these bogus reports, perhaps by
duplicating the declarations on separate lines so instead of:

void f (int[n1][2][n3][4][n5][6][*][8][n9]);   // { dg-warning "argument 1 of
type 'int\\\[n1]\\\[2]\\\[n3]\\\[4]\\\[n5]\\\[6]\\\[\\\*]\\\[8]\\\[n9]'
declared with 1 unspecified variable bound" "pr?????" { xfail *-*-* } }
// { dg-warning "argument 1 of type
'int\\\[n1]\\\[2]\\\[n3]\\\[4]\\\[n5]\\\[6]\\\[0]\\\[8]\\\[n9]' declared with 1
unspecified variable bound" "pr?????" { target *-*-* } .-1 }


We have:

void f (int[n1][2][n3][4][n5][6][*][8][n9]);   // { dg-warning "argument 1 of
type 'int\\\[n1]\\\[2]\\\[n3]\\\[4]\\\[n5]\\\[6]\\\[\\\*]\\\[8]\\\[n9]'
declared with 1 unspecified variable bound" "pr?????" { xfail *-*-* } }
void g (int[n1][2][n3][4][n5][6][*][8][n9]);  // { dg-warning "argument 1 of
type 'int\\\[n1]\\\[2]\\\[n3]\\\[4]\\\[n5]\\\[6]\\\[0]\\\[8]\\\[n9]' declared
with 1 unspecified variable bound" "pr?????" { target *-*-* } }

[Bug c++/100412] [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[schwab@linux-m68k.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100412

--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> ---
Or just change the test name to make it unique.

[Bug c++/100412] [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100412

--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The test name comes from the file name, the 'test for warnings' and the line
number.  Since both warnings are on the same line, that would require some
major hackery (unless that can be encoded in the dg-warning somehow).

[Bug c++/100412] [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[msebor at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100412

Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2021-05-04
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |msebor at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Let me change them.

[Bug testsuite/100412] [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[msebor at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100412

Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED

--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor <msebor at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.

[Bug testsuite/100412] [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100412

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |nickhuang99 at hotmail dot com

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
*** Bug 102122 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug testsuite/100412] [11/12 regression] PASS & FAIL for same test aarch64-qemu: gcc.dg/Wvla-parameter-[23].c pr?????

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100412

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |testsuite-fail
   Target Milestone|---                         |12.0

--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed in GCC 12 by r12-443-g141cce5c2cc16b.