From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@embecosm.com>
Cc: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com>,
dejagnu@gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH DejaGNU/GCC 0/1] Support per-test execution timeout factor
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2024 23:00:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mptfrze81l7.fsf@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2401031602140.5892@tpp.orcam.me.uk> (Maciej W. Rozycki's message of "Wed, 3 Jan 2024 16:38:26 +0000 (GMT)")
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@embecosm.com> writes:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
>> > The test execution timeout is different from the tool execution timeout
>> > where it is GCC execution that is being guarded against taking excessive
>> > amount of time on the test host rather than the resulting test case
>> > executable run on the target afterwards, as concerned here. GCC already
>> > has a `dg-timeout-factor' setting for the tool execution timeout, but has
>> > no means to increase the test execution timeout. The GCC side of these
>> > changes adds a corresponding `dg-test-timeout-factor' setting.
>>
>> Hmm. I think it would be more correct to emphasize that the
>> existing dg-timeout-factor affects both the tool execution *and*
>> the test execution, whereas your new dg-test-timeout-factor only
>> affects the test execution. (And still measured on the host.)
>
> Not really, `dg-timeout-factor' is only applied to tool execution and it
> doesn't affect test execution. Timeout value reporting used to be limited
> in DejaGNU, but you can enable it easily now by adding the DejaGNU patch
> series referred in the cover letter and see that `dg-timeout-factor' is
> ignored for test execution.
>
>> Usually the compilation time is close to 0, so is this based on
>> an actual need more than an itchy "wart"?
>>
>> Or did I miss something?
>
> Compilation is usually quite fast, but this is not always the case. If
> you look at the tests that do use `dg-timeout-factor' in GCC, and some
> commits that added the setting, then you ought to find actual use cases.
> I saw at least one such a test that takes an awful lot of time here on a
> reasonably fast host machine and still passes where GCC has been built
> with optimisation enabled, but does time out in the compilation phase if
> the compiler has been built at -O0 for debugging purposes. I'd have to
> chase it though if you couldn't find it as I haven't written the name
> down.
Sounds like it could be the infamous gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c :)
Richard
> So yes, `dg-timeout-factor' does have its use, but it is different from
> that of `dg-test-timeout-factor', hence the need for a separate setting.
>
> Maciej
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-03 23:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-12 14:04 Maciej W. Rozycki
2023-12-12 14:04 ` [PATCH DejaGNU 1/1] " Maciej W. Rozycki
2023-12-12 23:02 ` Jeff Law
2023-12-13 3:48 ` Jacob Bachmeyer
2023-12-12 14:04 ` [PATCH GCC 1/1] testsuite: Support test execution timeout factor as a keyword Maciej W. Rozycki
2023-12-12 23:03 ` Jeff Law
2024-01-03 5:15 ` [PATCH DejaGNU/GCC 0/1] Support per-test execution timeout factor Hans-Peter Nilsson
2024-01-03 16:38 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2024-01-03 23:00 ` Richard Sandiford [this message]
2024-01-04 3:18 ` Generalizing DejaGnu timeout scaling (was: Re: [PATCH DejaGNU/GCC 0/1] Support per-test execution timeout factor) Jacob Bachmeyer
2024-01-04 4:59 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2024-01-05 2:27 ` Generalizing DejaGnu timeout scaling Jacob Bachmeyer
2024-01-04 4:52 ` [PATCH DejaGNU/GCC 0/1] Support per-test execution timeout factor Hans-Peter Nilsson
2024-02-01 20:18 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
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=mptfrze81l7.fsf@arm.com \
--to=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=dejagnu@gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hp@bitrange.com \
--cc=macro@embecosm.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).