public inbox for libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: Alexandre Oliva <oliva@adacore.com>
Cc: gcc Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	"libstdc++" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libstdc++: testsuite: test symlnks ifdef _GLIBCXX_HAVE_SYMLINK
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:28:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACb0b4mkWE59c2ZLRT5oFzjmeOiarLraRzadkwJY7OgPr_xaHA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ora6a363tf.fsf@lxoliva.fsfla.org>

On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 at 12:02, Alexandre Oliva <oliva@adacore.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 22, 2022, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > OK.
>
> > I'd like to clean this up so the tests don't rely on the "internal"
> > HAVE_SYMLINK macro. We could add something like this to
> > testsuite/util/testsuite_fs.h
>
> > #if defined(__MINGW32__) || defined(__MINGW64__) \
> >   || !defined (_GLIBCXX_HAVE_SYMLINK)
> > # define NO_SYMLINKS
> > #endif
>
> I took your suggestion, and took it a little further.  Here's the
> result.

Nice, thanks!

>
> Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested with a cross to
> aarch64-rtems6.  Ok to install?

All the changes to the actual tests are fine.

> diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
> index 93fdfee687ddb..d71d88fb99837 100644
> --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/libstdc++.exp
> @@ -974,13 +974,16 @@ proc v3_try_preprocess { name code flags } {
>  }
>
>  # Return 1 if COND evaluates to true in the preprocessor, 0 otherwise.
> -# The <bits/c++config.h> config header is included.
> -proc v3_check_preprocessor_condition { name cond } {
> +# The <bits/c++config.h> config header is included, and INC, if given,
> +# is pasted between it and the condition evaluation, so it can be used
> +# for additional #include's.
> +proc v3_check_preprocessor_condition { name cond inc } {

Could this new arg be given a default value, so every caller doesn't
have to pass "" to it?

proc v3_check_preprocessor_condition { name cond {inc ""} } {

> diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util/testsuite_fs.h b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util/testsuite_fs.h
> index 9358a04e56c1f..048f03103e436 100644
> --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util/testsuite_fs.h
> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/util/testsuite_fs.h
> @@ -42,6 +42,11 @@ namespace test_fs = std::experimental::filesystem;
>  #include <random>   // std::random_device
>  #endif
>
> +#if defined(__MINGW32__) || defined(__MINGW64__) \
> +  || !defined (_GLIBCXX_HAVE_SYMLINK)
> +#define NO_SYMLINKS
> +#endif

I think this could be simplified to just
#ifndef _GLIBCXX_HAVE_SYMLINK
because that is false on mingw:
$ grep HAVE_SYMLINK include/x86_64-w64-mingw32/bits/c++config.h
/* #undef _GLIBCXX_HAVE_SYMLINK */

Windows uses CreateSymbolicLinkA to create its symlinks.

And if NO_SYMLINKS just becomes a "public" name for
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_SYMLINK that we can use in tests, then the dg
check_v3_target_fs_symlinks proc could just test that macro too,
without needing to include <testsuite_fs.h> to test NO_SYMLINKS. I
don't feel strongly about that though. The $inc addition to
v3_check_preprocessor_condition seems useful (although it will slow
down evaluation of that condition, because <testsuite_fs.h> includes a
lot of other headers).
And if the definition of NO_SYMLINKS gets more complicated in future
(e.g. we add something like && !defined __foo__) then using
NO_SYMLINKS in the dg proc will keep them in sync.

I'd like the default argument for v3_check_preprocessor_condition so
we don't need to add "" everywhere in that file, but the rest of the
patch is OK as-is or simplified as above, I don't mind. Even keeping
the MINGW tests in the NO_SYMLINKS definition is OK (it certainly
doesn't hurt, it's just a bit redundant).


  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-23 11:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-22  6:13 Alexandre Oliva
2022-06-22  9:25 ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-06-22 10:42   ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-06-23  3:41     ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-06-23 10:53   ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-06-23 11:39     ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-06-23 11:02   ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-06-23 11:28     ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
2022-06-23 11:29       ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-06-23 12:35       ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-06-23 12:37         ` Jonathan Wakely
2022-06-24  2:32         ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-06-27 13:29         ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-06-27 13:36           ` Jonathan Wakely

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=CACb0b4mkWE59c2ZLRT5oFzjmeOiarLraRzadkwJY7OgPr_xaHA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jwakely@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=oliva@adacore.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).