* DejaGnu diagnostics checking confused, possibly related to 'dg-line'?
@ 2020-11-03 12:31 ` Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-03 14:21 ` Thomas Schwinge
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Schwinge @ 2020-11-03 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc; +Cc: Tom de Vries, Rainer Orth, Mike Stump
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3140 bytes --]
Hi!
Help. Save the attached file as 'gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c',
and then run:
$ make check-gcc-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS=--all\ goacc.exp=l_.c
As expected for '-std=c++98' testing, which comes first:
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for errors, line 14)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for warnings, line 11)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for excess errors)
WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
But then it goes on with '-std=c++14', etc. testing:
UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for errors, line 14)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for warnings, line 11)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for excess errors)
WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for errors, line 14)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for warnings, line 11)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for excess errors)
WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for errors, line 14)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for warnings, line 11)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for excess errors)
WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 9
# of unresolved testcases 3
Why is suddenly the "test for errors, line 14" an UNRESOLVED? (The
compiler diagnostics are as expected. This testcase doesn't depend on
'-std=[...]' at all.)
And now the "funny" thing: if I disable any of the 'dg-line' directives,
it works as expected, all-PASS. But note that "test for errors, line 14"
doesn't even use a 'dg-line'-captured line number. (It uses absoute line
numbers. Same issue visible when using relative ones, or when actually
using 'dg-line' for these.)
I reduced this from a much bigger testcase, and had originally found this
not with 'check-gcc-c++' but with 'check-gcc-c': things worked fine as
long as testing just a single testcase, but broke when testing several.
(Again the symptom was that the first testcase worked fine, but the
following ones had an unexpecte UNRESOLVED for the first 'dg-error' (only
for the first!).) Supposedly, 'check-gcc-c++' with a single testcase but
testing several variants is exhibiting the same problem.
Grüße
Thomas
-----------------
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München / Germany
Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Alexander Walter
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: l_.c --]
[-- Type: text/x-csrc, Size: 436 bytes --]
static void test(void)
{
int i, j;
#pragma acc parallel
{
/* { dg-line l1 } */
/* { dg-line l2 } */
/* { dg-line l3 } */
#pragma acc loop gang
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
#pragma acc loop gang
/* { dg-error "inner loop uses same OpenACC parallelism as containing loop" "" { target *-*-* } 14 } */
/* { dg-message "containing loop" "" { target *-*-* } 11 } */
for (j = 0; j < 10; j++)
;
}
}
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: DejaGnu diagnostics checking confused, possibly related to 'dg-line'?
2020-11-03 12:31 ` DejaGnu diagnostics checking confused, possibly related to 'dg-line'? Thomas Schwinge
@ 2020-11-03 14:21 ` Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-24 13:16 ` Thomas Schwinge
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Schwinge @ 2020-11-03 14:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc, Tom de Vries; +Cc: Rainer Orth, Mike Stump
Hi!
I've investigated some more.
On 2020-11-03T13:31:53+0100, I wrote:
> Help. Save the attached file as 'gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c',
> and then run:
>
> $ make check-gcc-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS=--all\ goacc.exp=l_.c
>
> As expected for '-std=c++98' testing, which comes first:
>
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for errors, line 14)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for warnings, line 11)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
>
> But then it goes on with '-std=c++14', etc. testing:
>
> UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for errors, line 14)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for warnings, line 11)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
> UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for errors, line 14)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for warnings, line 11)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
> UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for errors, line 14)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for warnings, line 11)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
>
> === g++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 9
> # of unresolved testcases 3
>
> Why is suddenly the "test for errors, line 14" an UNRESOLVED? (The
> compiler diagnostics are as expected. This testcase doesn't depend on
> '-std=[...]' at all.)
>
> And now the "funny" thing: if I disable any of the 'dg-line' directives,
> it works as expected, all-PASS. But note that "test for errors, line 14"
> doesn't even use a 'dg-line'-captured line number. (It uses absoute line
> numbers. Same issue visible when using relative ones, or when actually
> using 'dg-line' for these.)
>
>
> I reduced this from a much bigger testcase, and had originally found this
> not with 'check-gcc-c++' but with 'check-gcc-c': things worked fine as
> long as testing just a single testcase, but broke when testing several.
> (Again the symptom was that the first testcase worked fine, but the
> following ones had an unexpecte UNRESOLVED for the first 'dg-error' (only
> for the first!).) Supposedly, 'check-gcc-c++' with a single testcase but
> testing several variants is exhibiting the same problem.
The problem is indeed related to the "WARNING: dg-line var [...] defined,
but not used" diagnostics. These are produced via DejaGnu 'warning'
calls, which increments 'warncnt', and once that reaches
'warning_threshold' (default per '/usr/share/dejagnu/framework.exp' is:
'set warning_threshold 3'), this triggers UNRESOLVED via
'/usr/share/dejagnu/framework.exp:record_test'. That this UNRESOLVED
appears for the *next* testcase, must be considered some kind of bug
(improper use of 'warning'?), I suppose.
The following works around that:
--- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
+++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
@@ -1008,6 +1008,8 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
} else {
regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
+ global warncnt
+ incr warncnt -1
}
}
unset save_linenr_varnames
..., or:
--- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
+++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
@@ -1007,7 +1007,7 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
eval unset $varname_used
} else {
regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
- warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
+ verbose "WARNING: dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used" 0
}
}
unset save_linenr_varnames
..., or hopefully something less hacky.
The question is, what quality/severity should the "dg-line var [...]
defined, but not used" diagnostic have?
For example, "FAIL":
--- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
+++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
@@ -1007,7 +1007,7 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
eval unset $varname_used
} else {
regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
- warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
+ fail "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
}
}
unset save_linenr_varnames
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for errors, line 14)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for warnings, line 11)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
FAIL: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
FAIL: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for errors, line 14)
[...]
..., or "NOTE":
--- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
+++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
@@ -1007,7 +1007,7 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
eval unset $varname_used
} else {
regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
- warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
+ note "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
}
}
unset save_linenr_varnames
Running [...]/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/goacc/goacc.exp ...
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for errors, line 14)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for warnings, line 11)
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for excess errors)
NOTE: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
NOTE: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
NOTE: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for errors, line 14)
[...]
..., or something else?
Grüße
Thomas
-----------------
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München / Germany
Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Alexander Walter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: DejaGnu diagnostics checking confused, possibly related to 'dg-line'?
2020-11-03 14:21 ` Thomas Schwinge
@ 2020-11-24 13:16 ` Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-30 19:46 ` Jeff Law
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Schwinge @ 2020-11-24 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc, Tom de Vries, Rainer Orth, Mike Stump
Hi!
Ping. Anybody got an opinion on the approach we should take?
Grüße
Thomas
On 2020-11-03T15:21:40+0100, I wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've investigated some more.
>
> On 2020-11-03T13:31:53+0100, I wrote:
>> Help. Save the attached file as 'gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c',
>> and then run:
>>
>> $ make check-gcc-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS=--all\ goacc.exp=l_.c
>>
>> As expected for '-std=c++98' testing, which comes first:
>>
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for errors, line 14)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for warnings, line 11)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for excess errors)
>> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
>>
>> But then it goes on with '-std=c++14', etc. testing:
>>
>> UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for errors, line 14)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for warnings, line 11)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for excess errors)
>> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
>> UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for errors, line 14)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for warnings, line 11)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++17 (test for excess errors)
>> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
>> UNRESOLVED: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for errors, line 14)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for warnings, line 11)
>> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++2a (test for excess errors)
>> WARNING: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
>> WARNING: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
>>
>> === g++ Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes 9
>> # of unresolved testcases 3
>>
>> Why is suddenly the "test for errors, line 14" an UNRESOLVED? (The
>> compiler diagnostics are as expected. This testcase doesn't depend on
>> '-std=[...]' at all.)
>>
>> And now the "funny" thing: if I disable any of the 'dg-line' directives,
>> it works as expected, all-PASS. But note that "test for errors, line 14"
>> doesn't even use a 'dg-line'-captured line number. (It uses absoute line
>> numbers. Same issue visible when using relative ones, or when actually
>> using 'dg-line' for these.)
>>
>>
>> I reduced this from a much bigger testcase, and had originally found this
>> not with 'check-gcc-c++' but with 'check-gcc-c': things worked fine as
>> long as testing just a single testcase, but broke when testing several.
>> (Again the symptom was that the first testcase worked fine, but the
>> following ones had an unexpecte UNRESOLVED for the first 'dg-error' (only
>> for the first!).) Supposedly, 'check-gcc-c++' with a single testcase but
>> testing several variants is exhibiting the same problem.
>
> The problem is indeed related to the "WARNING: dg-line var [...] defined,
> but not used" diagnostics. These are produced via DejaGnu 'warning'
> calls, which increments 'warncnt', and once that reaches
> 'warning_threshold' (default per '/usr/share/dejagnu/framework.exp' is:
> 'set warning_threshold 3'), this triggers UNRESOLVED via
> '/usr/share/dejagnu/framework.exp:record_test'. That this UNRESOLVED
> appears for the *next* testcase, must be considered some kind of bug
> (improper use of 'warning'?), I suppose.
>
> The following works around that:
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> +++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> @@ -1008,6 +1008,8 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
> } else {
> regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
> warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
> + global warncnt
> + incr warncnt -1
> }
> }
> unset save_linenr_varnames
>
> ..., or:
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> +++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> @@ -1007,7 +1007,7 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
> eval unset $varname_used
> } else {
> regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
> - warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
> + verbose "WARNING: dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used" 0
> }
> }
> unset save_linenr_varnames
>
> ..., or hopefully something less hacky.
>
>
> The question is, what quality/severity should the "dg-line var [...]
> defined, but not used" diagnostic have?
>
> For example, "FAIL":
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> +++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> @@ -1007,7 +1007,7 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
> eval unset $varname_used
> } else {
> regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
> - warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
> + fail "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
> }
> }
> unset save_linenr_varnames
>
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for errors, line 14)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for warnings, line 11)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
> FAIL: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
> FAIL: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for errors, line 14)
> [...]
>
> ..., or "NOTE":
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> +++ gcc/testsuite/lib/gcc-dg.exp
> @@ -1007,7 +1007,7 @@ if { [info procs saved-dg-test] == [list] } {
> eval unset $varname_used
> } else {
> regsub {^saved_linenr_} $varname "" org_varname
> - warning "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
> + note "dg-line var $org_varname defined, but not used"
> }
> }
> unset save_linenr_varnames
>
> Running [...]/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/goacc/goacc.exp ...
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for errors, line 14)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for warnings, line 11)
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++98 (test for excess errors)
> NOTE: dg-line var l1 defined, but not used
> NOTE: dg-line var l2 defined, but not used
> NOTE: dg-line var l3 defined, but not used
> PASS: c-c++-common/goacc/l_.c -std=c++14 (test for errors, line 14)
> [...]
>
> ..., or something else?
>
>
> Grüße
> Thomas
-----------------
Mentor Graphics (Deutschland) GmbH, Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München / Germany
Registergericht München HRB 106955, Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Alexander Walter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: DejaGnu diagnostics checking confused, possibly related to 'dg-line'?
2020-11-24 13:16 ` Thomas Schwinge
@ 2020-11-30 19:46 ` Jeff Law
2020-12-04 16:43 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2020-11-30 19:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Schwinge, gcc, Tom de Vries, Rainer Orth, Mike Stump
On 11/24/20 6:16 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Ping. Anybody got an opinion on the approach we should take?
Could we set warning_threshold to a value to inhibit this behavior
completely. It seems backwards to me that warnings have this effect.
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: DejaGnu diagnostics checking confused, possibly related to 'dg-line'?
2020-11-30 19:46 ` Jeff Law
@ 2020-12-04 16:43 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Maciej W. Rozycki @ 2020-12-04 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Law; +Cc: Thomas Schwinge, gcc, Tom de Vries, Rainer Orth, Mike Stump
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
> > Ping. Anybody got an opinion on the approach we should take?
> Could we set warning_threshold to a value to inhibit this behavior
> completely. It seems backwards to me that warnings have this effect.
Sounds like rate-limiting of some sort to me. It may be worth enquiring
at <dejagnu@gnu.org>, maybe Rob remembers what this was meant for.
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-12-04 16:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <464d854a-3387-ca8f-86bb-54cfc9da8767@mentor.com>
2020-11-03 12:31 ` DejaGnu diagnostics checking confused, possibly related to 'dg-line'? Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-03 14:21 ` Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-24 13:16 ` Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-30 19:46 ` Jeff Law
2020-12-04 16:43 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
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).