From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=wXag=AK=m.gmane-mx.org=gcc-patches@sourceware.org>
Received: from ciao.gmane.io (ciao.gmane.io [116.202.254.214])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C0C63857342
	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 16:35:00 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 0C0C63857342
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmx.de
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=m.gmane-mx.org
Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <gcc-patches@m.gmane-mx.org>)
	id 1ppAlm-0007Pz-Nq
	for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 18:34:58 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
From: Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: fix scan-tree-dump patterns [PR83904,
 PR100297]
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 18:34:52 +0200
Message-ID: <cf6e1cc5-45cb-4ab7-8360-c3993a7b0580@gmx.de>
References: <trinity-dc2a82bc-fc4e-44f2-bb38-38597e878fd9-1681846782121@3c-app-gmx-bs56>
 <a3394ed6-95de-c2ec-5040-60e1a4f71bb0@gmail.com>
 <CAC1BbcT2aRgZM04-iMeG5fjpnrmJC5Hjj=4yUB84uJeY-G3byQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.1
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <CAC1BbcT2aRgZM04-iMeG5fjpnrmJC5Hjj=4yUB84uJeY-G3byQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: fortran@gcc.gnu.org
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
Message-ID: <20230419163452.hh1_5-bgtGAKJ9BNgiBccyLuq9W-BfMSvIyHet5_epY@z>

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.