public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Testing a patch
@ 2023-05-29 13:09 Benjamin Priour
  2023-05-30 23:07 ` David Malcolm
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Benjamin Priour @ 2023-05-29 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc; +Cc: David Malcolm

Hi,

Regstrapping finally done for PR109439 - Spurious
-Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value tagging along
-Wanalyzer-out-of-bounds.
Now only a OOB warning is reported when necessary instead of OOB + Use
of uninitialized value.

Some tests in analyzer (out-of-bounds-*, realloc-5, pr101962) were
checking for the now removed use-of-uninitialized-value warning, and
therefore I fixed that.

But now I'm confused since the documentation reads that to perform
regtesting, one should use make -k check,
and that's what I always use too, but because I fixed the above test
files, contrib/compare_tests obviously complains about them having
disappeared.
Does it mean regtesting failed ? Can I submit the patch in its current
state or should I do something else before doing so ?
Guess I would get feedback anyway if something's wrong.

I figured I would send it here rather than to gcc-patches, as it's
more general than a discussion over a single patch.

Thanks,
Benjamin

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: Testing a patch
  2023-05-29 13:09 Testing a patch Benjamin Priour
@ 2023-05-30 23:07 ` David Malcolm
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: David Malcolm @ 2023-05-30 23:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Benjamin Priour, gcc

On Mon, 2023-05-29 at 15:09 +0200, Benjamin Priour wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Regstrapping finally done for PR109439 - Spurious
> -Wanalyzer-use-of-uninitialized-value tagging along
> -Wanalyzer-out-of-bounds.
> Now only a OOB warning is reported when necessary instead of OOB +
> Use
> of uninitialized value.
> 
> Some tests in analyzer (out-of-bounds-*, realloc-5, pr101962) were
> checking for the now removed use-of-uninitialized-value warning, and
> therefore I fixed that.
> 
> But now I'm confused since the documentation reads that to perform
> regtesting, one should use make -k check,
> and that's what I always use too, but because I fixed the above test
> files, contrib/compare_tests obviously complains about them having
> disappeared.
> Does it mean regtesting failed ?

If part of the purpose of a patch is the removal of certain tests, then
if compare_tests is "complaining" about them disappearing, then
arguably compare_tests is in fact verifying that the behavior of the
patch matches the intended behavior.  In this case, regression testing
has effectively passed.


>  Can I submit the patch in its current
> state or should I do something else before doing so ?

Yes, please submit the patch in its current state, to gcc-patches, and
CC me on it.

Thanks
Dave

> Guess I would get feedback anyway if something's wrong.
> 
> I figured I would send it here rather than to gcc-patches, as it's
> more general than a discussion over a single patch.
> 
> Thanks,
> Benjamin
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2023-05-30 23:07 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-05-29 13:09 Testing a patch Benjamin Priour
2023-05-30 23:07 ` David Malcolm

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).