From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.160.84]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75BCA3858D32 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2024 11:18:56 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 75BCA3858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 75BCA3858D32 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=129.70.160.84 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1713179938; cv=none; b=jp4WHPmghQZTz/i5N0HFMOoJfdUFExa3gEORn56t7ugJ8bXp7olAm9RYOuVZsM/gdsiIVxZYL54eHXRuKhcRiPwaInW6eO1Z+dYrsClMsHF+3VKH+bETyEdDQT4yHvz7jkDlQ/+rHOlgHXC9hcOT8MkLspvx2E/EvxpbsRTQG+0= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1713179938; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nmnDhTkqXfL5JCVl6JZ98pIxTv4Ql1avYYkUQ4ZjAx8=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=O+uaTQuYas7XBLn1iFfppbvveqkiEWT+upnsAoNGh0eDnvRk0TblvBvOK54ufzmUa3+S5D5x/O7eYBTj2F9OI82qEXYRZ+7nGyV/OFEgdqWu+auoL3k9y7S6Qm90jPOoGQzdRCo/++qACB2aM9sUxpPBelZ0HjTpkgdwi3gADu4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1F0CC19A; Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:18:55 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d= cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de; h=content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:mime-version:user-agent:message-id :in-reply-to:date:date:references:subject:subject:from:from :received:received; s=20200306; t=1713179935; bh=nmnDhTkqXfL5JCV l6JZ98pIxTv4Ql1avYYkUQ4ZjAx8=; b=FiEBFYg7q7weBK1q4lkLt2wArBI34ly a600VGr7unHEIbBkGGnBISJy52Hwx4eWd2VMCw8frgTyTZ9OThStLvGZtrn1dyY+ EW33jF4rv3BJAItslxAoQFcPKXruLZu+fgDnNeTt8Mg3J9tOfTOYOTLnYXjuSExr KP0ercTwLqAEXI6fFFg3Wrc+poax1ch2QlwJ24R2W3zqBYq1OZGgY7Y14qq5rKZI 0UrkBE2Ue/8BVyhKNFmxb9MGro7HuaGXuYxi+ps5THjWI5Sjl1FfvpOlWj/CJA4V jMe1fZPa+zveSw9ZdIKb/80NQb/V5LuxjpSe1ahTgCXRGPrKro55dmg== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id yEAZnxpYHq7q; Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:18:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p50855b96.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.133.91.150]) (Authenticated sender: ro) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D4B3CBE61; Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:18:55 +0200 (CEST) From: Rainer Orth To: =?utf-8?Q?J=C3=B8rgen?= Kvalsvik Cc: Jan Hubicka , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, richard.guenther@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] Add condition coverage (MC/DC) References: <20240223111800.1209438-1-j@lambda.is> <7033a2f7-42de-4bb3-a99a-28a35995c4a2@lambda.is> <8c5c6825-38ef-4dd3-b225-ddbec9eba3f6@lambda.is> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:18:54 +0200 In-Reply-To: <8c5c6825-38ef-4dd3-b225-ddbec9eba3f6@lambda.is> (=?utf-8?Q?=22J=C3=B8rgen?= Kvalsvik"'s message of "Mon, 15 Apr 2024 11:39:21 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3784.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi J=C3=B8rgen, >> the new gcc.misc-tests/gcov-22.c test loops on SPARC (both Solaris and >> Linux). I've filed PR gcov-profile/114720 for this, but couldn't find >> any bugzilla account of yours to Cc: >> Rainer >>=20 > > Rainer, > > Could you please try this patch? I don't have a sparc nor non-glibc build > (and getting a virtual one up will take a while). I suppose the problem is given that the test also FAILs on Linux/sparc64, it's not a glibc-vs-non-glibc issue. FWIW, there are both Solaris/SPARC and Linux/sparc64 systems available in the cfarm; no need to build one yourself. But fully agreed, running a full bootstrap to verify a single testcase is a bit much if it can be done more easily ;-) > that after longjmp the return address is to the call to setdest(), not > jump() (like is assumed), which creates the loop. If so, just guarding the > longjmp should be fine, the point of the test is to make sure that both > branches can be taken and recorded when the cond is a setjmp. If it works= I > will document it and post the patch. I've just tried the patch on both sparc-sun-solaris2.11 and i386-pc-solaris2.11 and the test now PASSes on both. Thanks. Rainer --=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University