From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 65876 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2016 22:12:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 65863 invoked by uid 89); 16 Nov 2016 22:12:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1513, H*RU:sk:host86-, Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:host86-, H*r:sk:host86- X-HELO: mail-wm0-f53.google.com Received: from mail-wm0-f53.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f53.google.com) (74.125.82.53) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 22:12:33 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id a197so270427737wmd.0 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:12:33 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=8LY59fi4+cK9ZXkLVo67jBugKQlVBoB/KKn5IXd5rQw=; b=ZLeN1iYCtPSonLxlG+h4K3w+CnYweggh+urrcBa+80zRgpf4ZS9qOhcbxe8wDidgBA nTF9jVutYhK9B2pORK2h9QbPaHnw9IKZNUIQhj7Sh8FBxDR5tmXz48qD6rLevtKdbnkR /ywYemJf81p3w3z/yM+4tWLnHQ8Q8EAq9j5MoyGBiSyj/pu9pciVD0jwZqv9tnXKuAlu PxgPJLgVuNXxlTn2LEiR0710VLiQzM8W1REX3D41nSPmIAscwFO/udmxAtdzzqoh+jBr SIE+xovuA80Ojs2iMwANF4OC3tFv+QE6AtZnChaZo2Rbfftc8dC+rBGC+XAlJCi4UQJZ eQBw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcTm0tYSpdasn9615xr2+sE7J0JF8ls67J90ptfpNC2njNrf2myvEd8QWcR5CtjzA== X-Received: by 10.28.52.76 with SMTP id b73mr13422192wma.8.1479334351430; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:12:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (host86-135-139-198.range86-135.btcentralplus.com. [86.135.139.198]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c187sm424100wmd.13.2016.11.16.14.12.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:12:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 22:12:00 -0000 From: Andrew Burgess To: Mike Stump Cc: Bernd Schmidt , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Jeff Law , Jakub Jelinek Subject: Re: Ping: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gcc: Remove unneeded global flag. Message-ID: <20161116221217.GH5975@embecosm.com> References: <512a967c-39c4-44f5-6f24-d75ef543979d@redhat.com> <20160629192130.GF8823@embecosm.com> <20160914130048.GC31794@embecosm.com> <03bef940-2b86-af7d-d2d2-b96b8283596f@redhat.com> <20161116200930.GG5975@embecosm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Editor: GNU Emacs [ http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs ] User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg01726.txt.bz2 * Mike Stump [2016-11-16 12:59:53 -0800]: > On Nov 16, 2016, at 12:09 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote: > > My only remaining concern is the new tests, I've tried to restrict > > them to targets that I suspect they'll pass on with: > > > > /* { dg-final-use { scan-assembler "\.section\[\t \]*\.text\.unlikely\[\\n\\r\]+\[\t \]*\.size\[\t \]*foo\.cold\.0" { target *-*-linux* *-*-gnu* } } } */ > > > > but I'm still nervous that I'm going to introduce test failures. Is > > there any advice / guidance I should follow before I commit, or are > > folk pretty relaxed so long as I've made a reasonable effort? > > So, if you are worried about the way the line is constructed, I usually test it by misspelling the *-*-linux* *-*-gnu* part as *-*-linNOTux* *-*-gnNOTu* and see if the test then doesn't run on your machine. If it doesn't then you can be pretty confident that only machines that match the target triplet can be impacted. I usually do this type of testing by running the test case in isolation (not the full tests suite). Anyway, do the best you can, and don't worry about t it too much, learn from the experience, even if it goes wrong in some way. If it did go wrong, just be responsive (don't check it in just before a 6 week vacation) about fixing it, if you can. > Thanks for the feedback. Change committed as revision 242519. If anyone sees any issues just let me know. Thanks, Andrew