From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from resdmta-c1p-023852.sys.comcast.net (resdmta-c1p-023852.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fd00:56::c]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 151033858C20 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 2023 20:41:05 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 151033858C20 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=comcast.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=comcast.net ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 151033858C20 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2001:558:fd00:56::c ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1699216866; cv=none; b=X32nkfZFHxhByoeiBOgWUF6X6p8jSfj6SWnX+hUzhtjMno3NiogvqtgQX/0nHfoAXNKIjqQTzcvlR6iKKRzOIYFKusexzjrOylSyiN8FSWMxMEMJjtDk7HX6SOd+GL1rQ1hXP3xkuwH7qOe2YcxHo5bwnLWs0sI1iHJNEpdSXSk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1699216866; c=relaxed/simple; bh=BP9/J8vIvrQo+u37tgyzPetGNOpVmgCJUVFfjLBROsM=; h=DKIM-Signature:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date:Message-Id:To; b=md4Va1prs5JM2CwqsBPQ34KSvsG8hS8JF/QsbsXjnQo23ref68t6B8AcOBZ8ZN4JOjlejBOEZ4kSOS923lhQGw7/qgrv1S7uqL4vWhDa7bYHz4KwLgFBVnpfu3Kd6ePCVkc4MjO3CfS4XfSBK0elACDDg6/exeEHTPVynX2EvPg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from resomta-c1p-023411.sys.comcast.net ([96.102.18.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 256/256 bits) (Client did not present a certificate) by resdmta-c1p-023852.sys.comcast.net with ESMTP id ziI3qrhF3bDq2zjvcqH3aj; Sun, 05 Nov 2023 20:41:04 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=20190202a; t=1699216864; bh=VnrSjh3vURoJci6D4HuI7HwwExhJqymG0YA4epSth5Q=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date: Message-Id:To:Xfinity-Spam-Result; b=DYOv2TCCvNIUim/cII0iWhrqweLOQWbjw3ovWAZK23DL630hIz8RvMLXzlj2/0X8t dHdcwyzNM/XFgIF3uGFZFbT72jePDNpTKdB++bBLivAWTFao0oQv/m/NgLq/utqjF0 3jYlJKb7jVHqL7fF9bkxy0cFm7RUFsn5dBDxkdGq3LsgUEdVz6+MHAq5SpHNwRpyB5 HVwrQ8Ncmo4cmt99sP0t4TcfYUs1K+VggtocELImAqts5V4MWUVFlFJTiv8vxOfgx2 WN7wONhyfLPA0bHbWgYlZ9CkYig3/Cz+CrkX86mSbhtch9brU9HP26MRAygV3RVkfz AYmd0ZcnoJ+3w== Received: from smtpclient.apple ([IPv6:2601:644:907f:7c80:dd0f:9e03:4598:be08]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 256/256 bits) (Client did not present a certificate) by resomta-c1p-023411.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPSA id zjvXqvMXRxA8xzjvYqDu4p; Sun, 05 Nov 2023 20:41:02 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.4\)) Subject: Re: testsuite: introduce hostedlib effective target From: Mike Stump In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2023 12:40:59 -0800 Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Rainer Orth Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <600FDF8F-67C5-408F-BD24-9A3964A8BFA1@comcast.net> References: To: Alexandre Oliva X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.4) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_HELO_PASS,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: On Nov 1, 2023, at 6:11 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >=20 > Several C++ tests fail with --disable-hosted-libstdcxx, whether > because stdc++ext gets linked in despite not being built, because > standard headers are included but that are unavailable in this mode, > or because headers are (mistakenly?) expected to introduce > declarations such as for ::abort, but in this mode they don't. >=20 > This patch introduces an effective target for GCC test, equivalent to > one that's available in the libstdc++-v3 testsuite, and arranges for > all such tests to be skipped when libstdc++-v3 is not hosted. >=20 > This patch was tested with arm-eabi, with libstdc++-v3 configured with > --disable-hosted-libstdcxx, on gcc-13, and with x86_64-linux-gnu > likewise on trunk. In the latter, there are a number of additional > fails that appear to be related, and that I'm yet to investigate, but > this is big enough already, so I figured I'd post this and see whether > the approach is regarded as sound and acceptable before proceeding any > further. WDYT? Ok to install, to deal with other targets > incrementally? Ick. I wish there were fewer changed lines and not 1 per test case. It = feels like we've painted ourselves into a corner. That said, I'd rather have a nice solid game plan that is better and = suggest it over this approach but, the best I can think of it something = that can notice after the fact during an error, and during error = processing, trim or expect, which is awfully vague. So, instead of commenting more, I'd ask if anyone has a nice, good = concrete idea and say I want to withdraw from the vague. If someone comes up with something you think is better, easy, smaller = and or other goodness and you want to go that direction, I'd encourage = that, otherwise, I'll approve this version.