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] |
Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 26 May 2015 at 18:25, Alan Lawrence <alan.lawrence@arm.com> wrote:I don't see this symptom - I am able to execute such subsets with either my, or Sandra's, advsimd-intrinsics.exp.I didn't try to run with your patch, I thought it was an oversight of yours. Sorry, indeed I've just checked that gcc-dg-runtest includes the filter.Is it that you have to check runtest_file_p because you are setting gcc_parallel_test_enable to 0? I'm doing more testing now, but I think I can drop my advsimd-intrinsics.exp changes altogether; I'll post an updated patch series shortly. In the meantime I'm curious as to why you found the gcc_parallel_test_enable necessary? (And is it safe to reset it to 1 afterwards, rather than to a saved value?)See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-10/msg00081.html
So after working through the differences between Sandra's and my patch, I find the existing advsimd-intrinsics.exp achieves pretty much the same thing, and preserves the same list of test variants (e.g. the -Og -g from set-torture-options which I had removed).
However, I've tried testing advsimd-intrinsics.exp (both the whole thing, and individual tests using RUNTESTFLAGS) with and without this hunk:
@@ -57,20 +57,7 @@ set-torture-options $C_TORTURE_OPTIONS {{}} $LTO_TORTURE_OPTI set additional_flags [add_options_for_arm_neon ""] # Main loop. -foreach src [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.c]] { - # If we're only testing specific files and this isn't one of them, skip it. - if ![runtest_file_p $runtests $src] then { - continue - } - - # runtest_file_p is already run above, and the code below can run - # runtest_file_p again, make sure everything for this test is - # performed if the above runtest_file_p decided this runtest - # instance should execute the test - gcc_parallel_test_enable 0 - gcc-dg-runtest $src "" $additional_flags - gcc_parallel_test_enable 1 -}+gcc-dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.\[cS\]]] "" ${additional_flags}
and find exactly the same tests are run and pass. My hypothesis is thus that you only need the explicit loop, manual checking of runtest_file_p, and gcc_parallel_test_enable, in order to do *both* c-torture-execute *and* gcc-dg-runtest; since we are now only doing the latter, this is unnecessary. Does that make sense? (If you agree, I'll propose that as a standalone cleanup patch.)
Cheers, Alan
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |