[Bug testsuite/95538] New: Unfinished cleanup in the test suite

[Bug testsuite/95538] New: Unfinished cleanup in the test suite

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95538

            Bug ID: 95538
           Summary: Unfinished cleanup in the test suite
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: testsuite
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
  Target Milestone: ---

Looking at the content gcc/testsuite I see

gcc/testsuite/gfortran:
binding_label_tests_10.mod  gfortran.log      
inline_matmul_14.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized    procs.mod
binding_label_tests_11.mod  gfortran.log.sep* 
inline_matmul_16.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized    site.exp
binding_label_tests_13.mod  gfortran.sum      
inline_transpose_1.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized 
test_common_binding_labels_3.mod
fmt_en.res                  gfortran.sum.sep  
internal_pack_24.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized   
vect-alias-check-1.ltrans0.ltrans.162t.vect

gcc/testsuite/gfortran1:
binding_label_tests_10.mod  gfortran.sum.sep                               
procs.mod
binding_label_tests_11.mod  inline_matmul_14.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized 
site.exp
binding_label_tests_13.mod  inline_matmul_16.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized 
volatile10.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized
gfortran.log.sep*           pr60510.ltrans0.ltrans.162t.vect

gcc/testsuite/gfortran2:
gfortran.log.sep*  gfortran.sum.sep 
inline_transpose_1.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized  site.exp

gcc/testsuite/gfortran3:
fmt_en.res         gfortran.sum.sep                                site.exp
gfortran.log.sep*  internal_pack_24.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized 
volatile10.ltrans0.ltrans.235t.optimized

gcc/testsuite/gfortran4:
gfortran.log.sep*  gfortran.sum.sep  mod1.mod  mod2.mod  site.exp 
vect-alias-check-1.ltrans0.ltrans.162t.vect

gcc/testsuite/gfortran5:
gfortran.log.sep*  gfortran.sum.sep  mod.mod  site.exp

gcc/testsuite/gfortran6:
gfortran.log.sep*  gfortran.sum.sep  site.exp

gcc/testsuite/gfortran7:
gfortran.log.sep*  gfortran.sum.sep  pr60510.ltrans0.ltrans.162t.vect  site.exp

and the situation ic much worse for gcc and g++.

[Bug testsuite/95538] Unfinished cleanup in the test suite

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95538

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Might be that after aolivas driver auxname patches some cleanup patterns no
longer match?

[Bug testsuite/95538] Unfinished cleanup in the test suite

[aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95538

--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
More likely we've just always missed these lto dump files: IIRC they used to be
created in tmpdir, even during -save-temps builds.

[Bug testsuite/95538] Unfinished cleanup in the test suite

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95538

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2020-07-17
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW

--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
I just caught this one

--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dtio_1.f90      2020-06-13
03:11:53.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dtio_1.f90        2020-07-18 00:09:32.000000000
+0200
@@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ PROGRAM test
   member%age=66
   astring = "SAME"
   read (10, *, iostat=myiostat, iomsg=astring) member, chairman, member
+  close(10, status='delete')
   ! The user defined procedure reads to the end of the line/file, then
finalizing the parent
   ! reads past, so we wrote a blank line above. User needs to address these
nuances in their
   ! procedures. (subject to interpretation)