From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 114825 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2019 13:48:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 114756 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jun 2019 13:48:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SEM_FRESH,SEM_URIRED,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=compare_tests, H*f:sk:w4xX6iX, H*f:Ck9-3, H*f:sk:7Zg0g@m X-HELO: mail-ed1-f41.google.com Received: from mail-ed1-f41.google.com (HELO mail-ed1-f41.google.com) (209.85.208.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 13:48:51 +0000 Received: by mail-ed1-f41.google.com with SMTP id a14so23981502edv.12 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 06:48:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ig83WX+GK0BrrU7U4IRuslPqQJJ2XMGPiN1soSQdJOo=; b=nls2r86w/uhQ7vRNcK5o+0HVdKiXP8crOfK0UBCDJna7SvTft8UCu1Ju4M2ysTdugT Rk3OKUVqwhkoo7MHM2UxrrZtgeMYIoKZayo2o3bKIb9oMjC/QZhtySPBxIjbE0OvsudQ la0jnf5SuSOntGzfaqRT63n6oC6Kwq+ve6AeprOA3n3vtTGlB88VjD4TZxLyFR4+zwPs /UVAkLFqE3ku5QgwmoSX+8RfdZlDgL/NFIJINP9+125FEFn/UwLwfdqWvY5nAFCyvPdd QsIJter+uKdSOyPVgAhOc6yy8+GPdvjmyGRX4yCbHtiJjMxGbHkNhcYZ5Z4f/AR1ePbk wPzQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190530213839.GF31586@gate.crashing.org> <97e48c33-93ab-8776-5ae5-bd1ce026d0a0@acm.org> In-Reply-To: From: Tejas Joshi Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 13:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Committing patches and other conventions (Was: Re: About GSOC) To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Martin Jambor Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-06/txt/msg00115.txt.bz2 Hello. Is this the correct sequence for regression test: 1. Revert back all the changes I made and then configure, build along with make bootstrap make -k check collect the *.sum files 2. Apply the patch and do the configuration, build as above 1 and then collect the *.sum files and compare them. How do I collect and inspect these *.sum files? Thanks, -Tejas On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 22:26, Martin Jambor wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Jun 03 2019, Tejas Joshi wrote: > > Hello. > > I have already sent a patch for roundeven implementation but I do not > > know how do I commit my changes to GCC. Am I supposed to create a > > branch or anything etc? > > You don't have to create a branch unless you think it would make ease > your own workflow. Once a patch is ready to go and has been explicitely > approved by a corresponding maintainer, you will be expected to commit > it directly to svn (we'll ask for a svn write access for you when we get > to that point). You'll find the list of maintainers in the MAINTAINERS > file of the gcc repository, I believe your patches will need approval > from a global reviewer, most probably Joseph. > > Before that happens, the code must be of course considered correct but > also must adhere to some conventions, please see > https://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html. Your patches so far lacked > a ChangeLog and testcases. Have a look at what other do when they post > patches to gcc-patches: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-06/ > > ChangeLog has to have the given, fairly strict format, but should be > very brief. When posting patches, you don't make it part of the patch > even though when committing, you are expected it to prepend the > corresponding ChangeLog file with your bit (see e.g. gcc/ChangeLog and > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog). > > You have always stated how you tested your patches but you are actually > supposed to add the testsuite and committed along with the functional > patch, so that other can then test they do not regress on the > functionality you have just added. > > That is why everybody including you has to test their patches also by > doing: > > make bootstrap > make -k check > > (with a -j level appropriate for your computer) and then collect *.sum > files from unpatched and patched runs and compare them (see script in > contrib/compare_tests) to make sure they did not introduce any > regressions. > > See section on "Testing patches" at https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html > for more details. > > Please ask about these mechanisms and conventions if anything is not > clear. I'll go and find the latest version of your roundeven patch and > see if I can help you a little (but I am likely to finish that only > tomorrow morning). > > Thanks, > > Martin