This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PATCH 01: Testsuite: compare outputs of a testcase compiled and run with 2 flags


On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 10:41 -0500, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Janis Johnson <janis187@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > I cleaned up the use of torture options so now it should be easier to
> > add a suite that combines a specified list of torture options with
> > another specified list; see gcc/testsuite/objc/execute/execute.exp
> > for an example.  All of the tests in a directory will be run with all
> > of those options.  Does that do what you need?
> >
> 
> No, this torture infrastructure is complementary to the changes
> proposed by Harsha.
> 
> With the torture infrastructure one should encode the check for the
> correctness of the results in the testcase itself.  This is difficult:
> we want a simpler way to do this checking, avoiding to write the check
> explicitely in the testcase.  We want to avoid writing testcases like
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-25.c where the check is explicitely in
> the testcase:
> 
>  /* check results:  */
>   for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
>     {
>       if (ib[i] != k)
>         abort ();
>     }
> 
> The patch proposed by Harsha allows to just write the testcase and
> compare outputs, avoiding the need of a check of the computation with
> abort calls.

Except for tests of library output functions, GCC tests should
be self-checking.  We wouldn't be able to notice new errors if
a test got the same wrong answers when compiled with two sets
of optimizations.

Janis


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]