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 for gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loop-1.c test case on IA64.


> From mark@codesourcery.com  Tue Jan 18 11:22:30 2005
> 
> Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> > Setting up a special effective-target keyword sounds like a lot of work
> > for one test.  How about the following?
> > 
> > /* { dg-final {scan-assembler times "foo" 5 { xfail hppa-*-* ia64-*-* } } } */
> > /* { dg-final {scan-assembler-times "foo,%r" 5 { target hppa-*-* } } }      */
> > /* { dg-final {scan-assembler-times "= foo" 5 { target ia64-*-* } } }       */
> > 
> > Is the listing of two triplet patterns in the xfail considered kosher?
> > I found a few examples of it in other tests.
> 
> That would work, but it would be confusing, as it would not seem that 
> there's some test in this file which is failing on PA and IA64, when 
> that's not really true.  You could mitigate that with a comment, but I'd 
> prefer that we not abuse XFAIL in this way.
> 
> I know this stuff is a hassle.

I wonder if we should have a 'skip' option (in addition to target and
xfail) so we don't have to use xfail for this.  There is 'dg-skip-if',
but that skips the entire test and the test does have value for the hppa
and ia64 platforms so I wouldn't want to skip it entirely.

Another option with this specific test is to remove the assembler scan
and just use the existing tree-dump scans to verify that the loop was
unrolled.  I don't know what people think about that idea.

Otherwise using xfail (and having comments to describe why) seems like
the best solution.

Steve Ellcey
sje@cup.hp.com


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