Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

[Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>]

Hi!

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:46:19 +0100, Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries@mentor.com> wrote:
> I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for 
> excess errors" FAILs due to:
> ...
> sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca.
> ...
> 
> This patch marks those testcases as requiring alloca.

I observed that this test case:

> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c (revision 246278)
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c (working copy)
> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
>  /* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target alloca } */
>  /* { dg-additional-options "-g" } */

... as well as this test case:

> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr79413.c (revision 246278)
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr79413.c (working copy)
> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target alloca } */
>  /* PR c/79413 */

... previously did PASS for anything but "-O0" (that is, any "alloca"
usage got optimized away).  Now changed as follows:

    [-FAIL:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.c-torture/compile/pr79413.c   -O0  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.c-torture/compile/pr79413.c   -O1  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.c-torture/compile/pr79413.c   -O2  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.c-torture/compile/pr79413.c   -O3 -g  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.c-torture/compile/pr79413.c   -Os  [-(test for excess errors)-]

    [-FAIL:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c   -O0  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c   -O1  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c   -O2  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c   -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c   -O3 -g  [-(test for excess errors)-]
    [-PASS:-]{+UNSUPPORTED:+} gcc.dg/torture/pr71881.c   -Os  [-(test for excess errors)-]

Would it be useful to XFAIL these for "-O0" only (along with a comment),
so that we continue testing that any "alloca" usage gets optimized away?
(Just an idea.)


Grüße
 Thomas