From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 108733 invoked by alias); 28 May 2015 12:11:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 108714 invoked by uid 89); 28 May 2015 12:11:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-qg0-f47.google.com Received: from mail-qg0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-qg0-f47.google.com) (209.85.192.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 28 May 2015 12:11:15 +0000 Received: by qgg60 with SMTP id 60so14980726qgg.2 for ; Thu, 28 May 2015 05:11:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Tt8x9/BRaJiCX8qyRj2f3Ruovb2JSkEjvr8tzunLYgI=; b=e1x8VO/wRp08io81dBdk8LH9FWga+3XNS4Yl5oH7fcyRWVVH0Y5CVV0KljplqkX7KW 1RBSmYUtdR0URuazuw/x9CcCrvT02ND9RKLXMbha8b6wjuJjxy0LrIfBxirIZxJS9/3+ 3sO00PmbWnGgLlwiIselr/WlphmabMp7I80PMGBHkpDTt+/CYAOxocjcA/Wn1Fk1/4Ko bt4Qkc6WgcytgupGb8nf12527phFpQYu8+uJTQqVY8gzt7jisJ9zJykwcrX0+6Yuclfw 1QfIYRghvMasmTGEmnq2QiRAO+vOPTr+Blxc5G4sRb0897uCr+A2AuJ2ef799MUIMNWq G6Ug== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkzhcwhX62DrLO69tiwAX07EYqSAn+UOpvDSwRjaDh2UGik2Pt/S5BSljYgsKxViVuINsPI MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.27.65 with SMTP id b62mr4354467qkb.107.1432815073414; Thu, 28 May 2015 05:11:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.102.164 with HTTP; Thu, 28 May 2015 05:11:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <5537D241.1000606@arm.com> <5537DC12.1050201@arm.com> <55649E74.6020600@arm.com> <5566EC4C.6060204@arm.com> Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 12:33:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/14][ARM/AArch64 testsuite] Use gcc-dg-runtest in advsimd-intrinsics.exp From: Christophe Lyon To: Alan Lawrence Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg02626.txt.bz2 On 28 May 2015 at 13:32, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On 28 May 2015 at 12:22, Alan Lawrence wrote: >> Christophe Lyon wrote: >>> >>> On 26 May 2015 at 18:25, Alan Lawrence wrote: >>>> >>>> I don't see this symptom - I am able to execute such subsets with either >>>> my, >>>> or Sandra's, advsimd-intrinsics.exp. >>> >>> >>> I didn't try to run with your patch, I thought it was an oversight of >>> yours. >>> >>> Sorry, indeed I've just checked that gcc-dg-runtest includes the filter. >>> >>>> Is it that you have to check runtest_file_p because you are setting >>>> gcc_parallel_test_enable to 0? >>>> >>>> I'm doing more testing now, but I think I can drop my >>>> advsimd-intrinsics.exp >>>> changes altogether; I'll post an updated patch series shortly. >>>> >>>> In the meantime I'm curious as to why you found the >>>> gcc_parallel_test_enable >>>> necessary? (And is it safe to reset it to 1 afterwards, rather than to a >>>> saved value?) >>> >>> See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-10/msg00081.html >> >> >> So after working through the differences between Sandra's and my patch, I >> find the existing advsimd-intrinsics.exp achieves pretty much the same >> thing, and preserves the same list of test variants (e.g. the -Og -g from >> set-torture-options which I had removed). >> >> However, I've tried testing advsimd-intrinsics.exp (both the whole thing, >> and individual tests using RUNTESTFLAGS) with and without this hunk: >> >> @@ -57,20 +57,7 @@ set-torture-options $C_TORTURE_OPTIONS {{}} >> $LTO_TORTURE_OPTI >> set additional_flags [add_options_for_arm_neon ""] >> >> # Main loop. >> -foreach src [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.c]] { >> - # If we're only testing specific files and this isn't one of them, skip >> it. >> - if ![runtest_file_p $runtests $src] then { >> - continue >> - } >> - >> - # runtest_file_p is already run above, and the code below can run >> - # runtest_file_p again, make sure everything for this test is >> - # performed if the above runtest_file_p decided this runtest >> - # instance should execute the test >> - gcc_parallel_test_enable 0 >> - gcc-dg-runtest $src "" $additional_flags >> - gcc_parallel_test_enable 1 >> -} >> +gcc-dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.\[cS\]]] "" >> ${additional_flags} >> >> and find exactly the same tests are run and pass. My hypothesis is thus that >> you only need the explicit loop, manual checking of runtest_file_p, and >> gcc_parallel_test_enable, in order to do *both* c-torture-execute *and* >> gcc-dg-runtest; since we are now only doing the latter, this is unnecessary. >> Does that make sense? (If you agree, I'll propose that as a standalone >> cleanup patch.) >> > > Indeed I think you are right. Since we no longer call > c-torture-execute, we no longer need to call runtest_file_p here. > Having only one remaining call to runtest_file_p in gcc-dg-runtest is > parallel-safe. Thanks for the cleanup. > So in fact, except for the comment about '-w' it seems you initial patch was mostly OK, right? > Christophe. > >> Cheers, Alan >>