From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org,
Jozef Lawrynowicz <jozefl@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Support 'UNSUPPORTED: [...]: exception handling disabled' for libstdc++ testing (was: Support in the GCC(/C++) test suites for '-fno-exceptions')
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2023 09:12:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACb0b4m3-WfdsOnBj_K-Hi2ZfO3H9ma4PROGqqSKX3=xzDZcjw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y1kvpwxo.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6661 bytes --]
On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 08:13, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 2023-06-06T20:31:21+0100, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 20:14, Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
> > wrote:
> >> This issue comes up in context of me working on C++ support for GCN and
> >> nvptx target. Those targets shall default to '-fno-exceptions' -- or,
> >> "in other words", '-fexceptions' is not supported. (Details omitted
> >> here.)
> >>
> >> It did seem clear to me that with such a configuration it'll be hard to
> >> get clean test results. Then I found code in
> >> 'gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp:gcc-dg-prune':
> >>
> >> # If exceptions are disabled, mark tests expecting exceptions to be
> >> enabled
> >> # as unsupported.
> >> if { ![check_effective_target_exceptions_enabled] } {
> >> if [regexp "(^|\n)\[^\n\]*: error: exception handling disabled"
> >> $text] {
> >> return "::unsupported::exception handling disabled"
> >> }
> >>
> >> ..., which, in a way, sounds as if the test suite generally is meant to
> >> produce useful results for '-fno-exceptions', nice surprise!
> >>
> >> Running x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (not yet GCN, nvptx) 'make check' with:
> >>
> >> RUNTESTFLAGS='--target_board=unix/-fno-exceptions\{,-m32\}'
> >>
> >> ..., I find that indeed this does work for a lot of test cases, where we
> >> then get (random example):
> >>
> >> PASS: g++.dg/coroutines/pr99710.C (test for errors, line 23)
> >> -PASS: g++.dg/coroutines/pr99710.C (test for excess errors)
> >> +UNSUPPORTED: g++.dg/coroutines/pr99710.C: exception handling
> disabled
> >>
> >> ..., due to:
> >>
> >> [...]/g++.dg/coroutines/pr99710.C: In function 'task my_coro()':
> >> +[...]/g++.dg/coroutines/pr99710.C:18:10: error: exception handling
> >> disabled, use '-fexceptions' to enable
> >> [...]/g++.dg/coroutines/pr99710.C:23:7: error: await expressions
> are
> >> not permitted in handlers
> >> compiler exited with status 1
> >>
> >> But, we're nowhere near clean test results: PASS -> FAIL as well as
> >> XFAIL -> XPASS regressions, due to 'error: exception handling disabled'
> >> precluding other diagnostics seems to be one major issue.
> >>
> >> Is there interest in me producing the obvious (?) changes to those test
> >> cases, such that compiler g++ as well as target library libstdc++ test
> >> results are reasonably clean? (If you think that's all "wasted effort",
> >> then I suppose I'll just locally ignore any FAILs/XPASSes/UNRESOLVEDs
> >> that appear in combination with
> >> 'UNSUPPORTED: [...]: exception handling disabled'.)
> >
> > I would welcome that for libstdc++.
>
> Assuming no issues found in testing, OK to push the attached
> "Support 'UNSUPPORTED: [...]: exception handling disabled' for libstdc++
> testing"?
> (Thanks, Jozef!)
>
Yes please.
>
> > I do sometimes run the libstdc++ tests
> > with "unusual" options, like -fno-exceptions and -fno-rtti (e.g. today
> I've
> > been fixing FAILs that only happen with -fexcess-precision=standard). I
> > just manually ignore the tests that fail for -fno-exceptions, but it
> would
> > be great if they were automatically skipped as UNSUPPORTED.
> >
> > We already have a handful of tests that use #if __cpp_exceptions to make
> > those parts conditional on exception support. We also have exactly one
> test
> > that is currently UNSUPPORTED when -fno-exceptions is used:
> > testsuite/18_support/nested_exception/rethrow_if_nested-term.cc:// {
> > dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "-fno-exceptions" } }
>
> ACK -- that'll only work for explicit '-fno-exceptions', but not for
> implicit (say, via 'CC1PLUS_SPEC'), right?
That's right.
> So, indeed:
>
> > That could be changed to use an effective target keyword instead.
>
> I'll look into that later.
>
> > To add an effective-target to the libstdc++ testsuite would be as simple
> as:
> >
> > --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
> > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
> > @@ -1421,6 +1421,14 @@ proc check_effective_target_tzdb { } {
> > }]
> > }
> >
> > +# Return 1 if exception handling is enabled.
> > +proc check_effective_target_exceptions_enabled { } {
> > + return [check_v3_target_prop_cached et_eh {
> > + set cond "defined __cpp_exceptions"
> > + return [v3_check_preprocessor_condition eh $cond]
> > + }]
> > +}
> > +
>
> Well, we don't even need to do that, because:
>
> > However, you probably want to add it to the main testsuite instead, which
> > would be a little more involved (the v3_check_preprocessor_condition proc
> > is specific to libstdc++).
>
> ..., this has already been done in Subversion r279246
> (Git commit a9046e9853024206bec092dd63e21e152cb5cbca)
> "[MSP430] -Add fno-exceptions multilib" (thanks, Jozef!):
>
Nice.
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
> +++ gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
> @@ -8990,6 +8990,24 @@ proc check_effective_target_exceptions {} {
> return 1
> }
>
> +# Used to check if the testing configuration supports exceptions.
> +# Returns 0 if exceptions are unsupported or disabled (e.g. by passing
> +# -fno-exceptions). Returns 1 if exceptions are enabled.
> +proc check_effective_target_exceptions_enabled {} {
> + return [check_cached_effective_target exceptions_enabled {
> + if { [check_effective_target_exceptions] } {
> + return [check_no_compiler_messages exceptions_enabled assembly
> {
> + void foo (void)
> + {
> + throw 1;
> + }
> + }]
> + } else {
> + # If exceptions aren't supported, then they're not enabled.
> + return 0
> + }
> + }]
> +}
>
> proc check_effective_target_tiny {} {
> return [check_cached_effective_target tiny {
>
> ..., and it even already has one usage in libstdc++, per your
> commit 4c27c6584d0c15926f57ac40f931e238cf0b3110
> "libstdc++: Make testsuite usable with -fno-exceptions":
>
> --- libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/vector/bool/72847.cc
> +++ libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/vector/bool/72847.cc
> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
> // with this library; see the file COPYING3. If not see
> // <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
>
> -// { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "-fno-exceptions" } }
> +// { dg-require-effective-target exceptions_enabled }
>
> #include <vector>
> #include <ext/throw_allocator.h>
>
> ;-)
>
>
Ha! I forgot all about that.
I'll change the rethrow_if_nested-term.cc test to the the effective target
instead of dg-skip-if.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-07 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <873534qu9e.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net>
[not found] ` <CACb0b4kDiwp5nEY952rbLAKy7_+iJey71z3WNMUxahTaLQt6vA@mail.gmail.com>
2023-06-07 7:13 ` Thomas Schwinge
2023-06-07 8:12 ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
2023-06-07 9:08 ` Thomas Schwinge
2023-06-07 11:51 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-06-07 15:56 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-06-15 15:15 ` Skip a number of C++ test cases for '-fno-exceptions' " Thomas Schwinge
2023-06-15 15:47 ` Skip a number of C++ "split files" test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Skip a number of C++ test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Support in the GCC(/C++) test suites for '-fno-exceptions')) Thomas Schwinge
2023-11-03 11:08 ` Skip a number of 'g++.dg/compat/' test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Skip a number of C++ "split files" test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Skip a number of C++ test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Support in the GCC(/C++) test suites for '-fno-exceptions'))) Thomas Schwinge
2023-11-03 11:10 ` Skip a number of 'g++.dg/lto/' " Thomas Schwinge
2023-06-15 16:04 ` Skip a number of C++ 'g++.dg/tree-prof/' test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Skip a number of C++ test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Support in the GCC(/C++) test suites for '-fno-exceptions')) Thomas Schwinge
2023-11-03 11:12 ` Skip a number of " Thomas Schwinge
2023-09-08 13:30 ` Skip a number of C++ test cases for '-fno-exceptions' testing (was: Support in the GCC(/C++) test suites for '-fno-exceptions') Thomas Schwinge
2023-11-03 11:03 ` Thomas Schwinge
2023-11-03 11:15 ` Jakub Jelinek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CACb0b4m3-WfdsOnBj_K-Hi2ZfO3H9ma4PROGqqSKX3=xzDZcjw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jozefl@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=thomas@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).