* [trans-mem] XFAIL known failures
@ 2011-11-03 22:26 Aldy Hernandez
2011-11-03 23:42 ` Andrew Pinski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Aldy Hernandez @ 2011-11-03 22:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches, Richard Henderson
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 93 bytes --]
These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations. XFAILing them.
Committed to branch.
[-- Attachment #2: curr --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 5393 bytes --]
libitm/
* testsuite/libitm.c/reentrant.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C: XFAIL.
gcc/
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-3.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-4.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-5.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-7.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-1.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-2.c: XFAIL.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-3.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-3.c (revision 180744)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-3.c (working copy)
@@ -16,5 +16,5 @@ int f()
return lala.x[0];
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "logging: lala.x\\\[i_1\\\]" 1 "tmmark" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "logging: lala.x\\\[i_1\\\]" 1 "tmmark" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "tmmark" } } */
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-5.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-5.c (revision 180744)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-5.c (working copy)
@@ -19,5 +19,5 @@ int f()
return lala.x[i];
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "ITM_LU\[0-9\] \\\(&lala.x\\\[55\\\]" 1 "tmedge" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "ITM_LU\[0-9\] \\\(&lala.x\\\[55\\\]" 1 "tmedge" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "tmedge" } } */
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-7.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-7.c (revision 180744)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-7.c (working copy)
@@ -17,6 +17,6 @@ int f()
return lala.x[asdf];
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "tm_save.\[0-9_\]+ = lala" 1 "tmedge" } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "lala = tm_save" 1 "tmedge" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "tm_save.\[0-9_\]+ = lala" 1 "tmedge" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "lala = tm_save" 1 "tmedge" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "tmedge" } } */
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-1.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-1.c (revision 180863)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-1.c (working copy)
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ void f(void)
}
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "mystruct = \{ .*ESCAPED" 1 "ealias" } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "someptr = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "ui\..* = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "pp\..* = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "someptr = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "ui\..* = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "pp\..* = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "ealias" } } */
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-4.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-4.c (revision 180744)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-4.c (working copy)
@@ -19,6 +19,6 @@ int f()
return lala.x[i];
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "tm_save.\[0-9_\]+ = lala.x\\\[55\\\]" 1 "tmedge" } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "lala.x\\\[55\\\] = tm_save" 1 "tmedge" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "tm_save.\[0-9_\]+ = lala.x\\\[55\\\]" 1 "tmedge" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "lala.x\\\[55\\\] = tm_save" 1 "tmedge" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "tmedge" } } */
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-2.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-2.c (revision 180863)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/alias-2.c (working copy)
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ void foo()
candy();
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "ui\..* = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "ui\..* = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "mystruct.*ESCAPED" 1 "ealias" } } */
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "pp = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "pp = same as mystruct" 1 "ealias" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
/* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "ealias" } } */
Index: libitm/testsuite/libitm.c/reentrant.c
===================================================================
--- libitm/testsuite/libitm.c/reentrant.c (revision 180744)
+++ libitm/testsuite/libitm.c/reentrant.c (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
+/* { dg-do run { xfail *-*-* } }
+
/* Tests that new transactions can be started from both transaction_pure and
transaction_unsafe code. This also requires proper handling of reentrant
nesting in the serial_lock implementation. */
Index: libitm/testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C
===================================================================
--- libitm/testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C (revision 180744)
+++ libitm/testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C (working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
-// { dg-do run }
+/* { dg-do run } */
+/* { dg-xfail-if "" { *-*-* } { "*" } { "" } } */
/* Tests static constructors inside of transactional code. */
#include <pthread.h>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [trans-mem] XFAIL known failures
2011-11-03 22:26 [trans-mem] XFAIL known failures Aldy Hernandez
@ 2011-11-03 23:42 ` Andrew Pinski
2011-11-03 23:50 ` Aldy Hernandez
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Pinski @ 2011-11-03 23:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Aldy Hernandez; +Cc: gcc-patches, Richard Henderson
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
> These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations. XFAILing them.
I think you should file a bug about each missed optimization and
reference the bug # in the testcase. This is so we don't lose track
of the missed optimizations.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [trans-mem] XFAIL known failures
2011-11-03 23:42 ` Andrew Pinski
@ 2011-11-03 23:50 ` Aldy Hernandez
2011-11-07 4:46 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Aldy Hernandez @ 2011-11-03 23:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Pinski; +Cc: gcc-patches, Richard Henderson
On 11/03/11 18:30, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Aldy Hernandez<aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
>> These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations. XFAILing them.
>
> I think you should file a bug about each missed optimization and
> reference the bug # in the testcase. This is so we don't lose track
> of the missed optimizations.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew Pinski
Sure, I can do that.
What do you suggest, a bug report per failure with nothing but the
directory/name of the test?
Do you mind if I do this after the merge (if it gets approved)? I'm
trying to concentrate on merge blockers.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [trans-mem] XFAIL known failures
2011-11-03 23:50 ` Aldy Hernandez
@ 2011-11-07 4:46 ` Jeff Law
2011-11-16 18:35 ` Aldy Hernandez
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2011-11-07 4:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Aldy Hernandez; +Cc: Andrew Pinski, gcc-patches, Richard Henderson
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 11/03/11 17:40, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On 11/03/11 18:30, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Aldy Hernandez<aldyh@redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>> These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations.
>>> XFAILing them.
>>
>> I think you should file a bug about each missed optimization and
>> reference the bug # in the testcase. This is so we don't lose
>> track of the missed optimizations.
>>
>> Thanks, Andrew Pinski
>
> Sure, I can do that.
>
> What do you suggest, a bug report per failure with nothing but the
> directory/name of the test?
I'd say a bug report for each distinct failure. It can get awful
confusing when there's multiple bugs in a single PR...
> Do you mind if I do this after the merge (if it gets approved)?
> I'm trying to concentrate on merge blockers.
XFAIL prior to merge, file bugs after is fine.
Thanks,
jeff
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOt1yBAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7a40H/jgJToPzkqC4ukuSKRY3rW86
htsGB7BveZm+9pcuMl5mHHfdtHaLsamCEx9Jt1DNIVZApCYAreAQTg/3kTQowXVy
ATzXsGg0ymcgb89QwA9m92LKNswgHrTuVWRqbQMV/69cPC++C5RGo6dovn6RmLtm
ok7YVDQX+4XUBqK4+C0GQn6T8uIAVuopa/qoIvUHrMWyoLeqJw/3hD2wve2WdZVv
PrsVSI6l8sOJbO7e0Xa5eZRiqWs4nguO6ROXBZRCxI1uIXeaEa65kmfCFg2XrvsW
Th037xmKs/Ua2mJ0sv0TFFBj0ckjGPxrrZ1CAsZX8oBdL7+F8M90RLy4VktKYXE=
=430I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [trans-mem] XFAIL known failures
2011-11-07 4:46 ` Jeff Law
@ 2011-11-16 18:35 ` Aldy Hernandez
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Aldy Hernandez @ 2011-11-16 18:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Law; +Cc: Andrew Pinski, gcc-patches, Richard Henderson
>> What do you suggest, a bug report per failure with nothing but the
>> directory/name of the test?
> I'd say a bug report for each distinct failure. It can get awful
> confusing when there's multiple bugs in a single PR...
Done. PR numbers below.
There is no trans-mem or libitm component, so I had to select other.
Thanks for your patience.
51163 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- gcc.dg/tm/alias-1.c
failure
51164 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- gcc.dg/tm/alias-2.c
failure
51165 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- gcc.dg/tm/memopt-3.c
failure
51166 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- gcc.dg/tm/memopt-4.c
failure
51167 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- gcc.dg/tm/memopt-5.c
failure
51168 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- gcc.dg/tm/memopt-7.c
failure
51169 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- XFAIL:
libitm.c/dropref-2.c execution test
51170 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- XFAIL:
libitm.c/dropref.c execution test
51171 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- XFAIL:
libitm.c/reentrant.c execution test
51172 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- XFAIL:
libitm.c++/dropref.C execution test
51173 nor P3 unassigned@gcc.gnu.org NEW --- XFAIL:
libitm.c++/static_ctor.C
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-11-16 16:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-11-03 22:26 [trans-mem] XFAIL known failures Aldy Hernandez
2011-11-03 23:42 ` Andrew Pinski
2011-11-03 23:50 ` Aldy Hernandez
2011-11-07 4:46 ` Jeff Law
2011-11-16 18:35 ` Aldy Hernandez
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).