From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81395 invoked by alias); 26 May 2015 18:53:23 -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 81381 invoked by uid 89); 26 May 2015 18:53:22 -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-qk0-f173.google.com Received: from mail-qk0-f173.google.com (HELO mail-qk0-f173.google.com) (209.85.220.173) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:53:21 +0000 Received: by qkdn188 with SMTP id n188so97405845qkd.2 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 11:53:19 -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=UKWWTq8uosHumOcQlyepS7DUIbo0KOf9yhNALlbUR1w=; b=kUOSQTIfjUu6dLW/uzisnHLNvIIcLlUEQHLIksyrV47SMjTkg4buBzmywDHVDxwThh X4egPHEqzeVYGjNdaUwBsVIV6gqgtqMxFcuxWXwdVu1HtwZaDFbvXCG3f0BAoHvtoFja nVNCxxfmf6lztZp9sR/grirur5rZ53STygwyY16IPs1bymfyzsWGSqPgU1G/jG0zW5tq UAMNufoZ6lqJ2GAuj2DyrO4FUrg6W+KK/Oj1oOAcGwpwZyThHwJv24luu4GeSHL/YO3l dWEAFnVqIc8//ETp5GhrCIowWTSbVmT7Vok7yd41bB+omnORp/JBuIxXrEbi7zR7M3/Q KevA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk/SajFmT7fiPYYEQxab+Hr80MzW0oXxjc8MmPMVZxUZVpMYpxZSqyVD0lLo8XWQxl8GlyC MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.94.74 with SMTP id f68mr35230362qge.38.1432666398966; Tue, 26 May 2015 11:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.102.164 with HTTP; Tue, 26 May 2015 11:53:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55649E74.6020600@arm.com> References: <5537D241.1000606@arm.com> <5537DC12.1050201@arm.com> <55649E74.6020600@arm.com> Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 19:12:00 -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/msg02366.txt.bz2 On 26 May 2015 at 18:25, Alan Lawrence wrote: > Christophe Lyon wrote: >> >> On 22 April 2015 at 19:36, Alan Lawrence wrote: >>> >>> In the first revision of Christophe Lyon's advsimd-intrinsics tests, >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg00532.html , both >>> gcc-dg-runtest (to assemble only) and c-torture-execute were used. In >>> review >>> the gcc-dg-runtest part was then dropped, and execution tests continued >>> using c-torture-execute. However, c-torture-execute ignores e.g. >>> dg-options >>> directives in the individual test files, whereas gcc-dg-runtest does not. >>> >>> This patch switches to gcc-dg-runtest (with dg-do-what-default = "run") >>> for >>> all tests, allowing use of e.g. dg-options (in testsuite patch 3/3). This >> >> >> Sandra has recently committed a slightly different patch. >> >> If you want to update your, here are few comments/questions: >> - why do you add "-w" to additional_flags? > > > Hmmm. Not sure now. I agree, it appears to work without, so will drop that. > >> - you changed the way we iterate over the tests, but this removes the >> possiblity to actually execute only a subset of the available tests, >> such as RUNTESTFLAGS=advsimd-intrinsics.exp=vadd.c > > > 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 > > TYVM for your other comments and review - I will incorporate all into my > next revision. Thanks. > > Thanks, Alan >