Hi! I know I'm late this week ;-\ -- but here is another ping. Grüße Thomas On 2021-11-22T11:27:49+0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > Ping. > > > Grüße > Thomas > > > On 2021-11-15T15:50:58+0100, I wrote: >> Hi! >> >> ..., and here is another ping. >> >> >> Grüße >> Thomas >> >> >> On 2021-11-08T11:45:12+0100, I wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> Ping, once more. >>> >>> >>> Grüße >>> Thomas >>> >>> >>> On 2021-10-14T12:12:41+0200, I wrote: >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> Ping, again. >>>> >>>> Commit log updated for >>>> "privatization-1-compute.c results in both XFAIL and PASS". >>>> >>>> >>>> Grüße >>>> Thomas >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2021-09-30T08:42:25+0200, I wrote: >>>>> Hi! >>>>> >>>>> Ping. >>>>> >>>>> On 2021-09-22T13:03:46+0200, I wrote: >>>>>> On 2021-09-19T11:35:00-0600, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote: >>>>>>> A couple of goacc tests do not have unique names. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for fixing this up, and sorry, largely my "fault", I suppose. ;-| >>>>>> >>>>>>> This causes problems >>>>>>> for the test comparison script when one of the test passes and the other >>>>>>> fails -- in this scenario the test comparison script claims there is a >>>>>>> regression. >>>>>> >>>>>> So I understand correctly that this is a problem not just for actual >>>>>> mixed PASS vs. FAIL (which we'd like you to report anyway!) that appear >>>>>> for the same line, but also for mixed PASS vs. XFAIL? (Because, the >>>>>> latter appears to be what you're addressing with your commit here.) >>>>>> >>>>>>> This slipped through for a while because I had turned off x86_64 testing >>>>>>> (others test it regularly and I was revamping the tester's hardware >>>>>>> requirements). Now that I've acquired more x86_64 resources and turned >>>>>>> on native x86 testing again, it's been flagged. >>>>>> >>>>>> (I don't follow that argument -- these test cases should be all generic? >>>>>> Anyway, not important, I guess.) >>>>>> >>>>>>> This patch just adds a numeric suffix to the TODO string to disambiguate >>>>>>> them. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, instead of doing this manually (always error-prone!), like you've... >>>>>> >>>>>>> Committed to the trunk, >>>>>> >>>>>>> commit f75b237254f32d5be32c9d9610983b777abea633 >>>>>>> Author: Jeff Law >>>>>>> Date: Sun Sep 19 13:31:32 2021 -0400 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [committed] Make test names unique for a couple of goacc tests >>>>>> >>>>>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 >>>>>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 >>>>>>> @@ -39,9 +39,9 @@ contains >>>>>>> !$acc atomic write ! ... to force 'TREE_ADDRESSABLE'. >>>>>>> y = a >>>>>>> !$acc end parallel >>>>>>> - ! { dg-note {variable 'i' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>>>> - ! { dg-note {variable 'j' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>>>> - ! { dg-note {variable 'a' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>>>> + ! { dg-note {variable 'i' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO2" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>>>> + ! { dg-note {variable 'j' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO3" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>>>> + ! { dg-note {variable 'a' in 'private' clause potentially has improper OpenACC privatization level: 'parm_decl'} "TODO4" { xfail *-*-* } l_compute$c_compute } >>>>>> >>>>>> ... etc. (also similarly in a handful of earlier commits, if I remember >>>>>> correctly), why don't we do that programmatically, like in the attached >>>>>> "Make sure that we get unique test names if several DejaGnu directives >>>>>> refer to the same line", once and for all? OK to push after proper >>>>>> testing? >>>>> >>>>> Attached again, for easy reference. >>>>> >>>>> I figure it may help if I showed an example of how this changes things; >>>>> for the test case cited above (word-diff): >>>>> >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 40+} (test for warnings, line 39) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 41+} (test for warnings, line 22) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 42+} (test for warnings, line 39) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 43+} (test for warnings, line 22) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 44+} (test for warnings, line 39) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 45+} (test for warnings, line 22) >>>>> XFAIL: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO2 {+at line 50+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>>>> XFAIL: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO3 {+at line 51+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>>>> XFAIL: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO4 {+at line 52+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O TODO {+at line 53+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O {+at line 54+} (test for warnings, line 29) >>>>> PASS: gfortran.dg/goacc/privatization-1-compute.f90 -O (test for excess errors) >>>>> >>>>> Given that we now amend the 'comment' by 'at line $useline"', and given >>>>> that only ever one DejaGnu directive may appear on one source line, all >>>>> these output lines now must be unique. (If we wanted to, we again could >>>>> 's%TODO[0-9]+%TODO%', reverting your change cited above.) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Grüße >>>>> Thomas ----------------- Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht München, HRB 106955