Re: Comments on check-abi

[Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>]

Hey Andreas

>- Unify names: We should unify the names of the directories and find
>  the right one in case that somebody gives a different name to
>  configure.  Also the i586-linux and i686-linux ABIs should be the
>  same.  I'll send a patch implementing this in a separate email.

I think unifying names is a good idea.

However, I'd rather that the abi directories match the config/cpu ones.
Sadly, they do not. Also, the vendor bit is immaterial: so only cpu and
os should matter. What do you think about:

i686-pc-linux-gnu 

to

i486-linux-gnu

?

Similarly for the rest of the directories. Then, your proposed patch to
do the necessary matches.

>- Create baseline automatically if not exists: We should create the
>  baseline automatically if it does not exist so that we encourage
>  users to send the results in.

Yes.

>- We should always run the testsuite and consider a failure in
>  check-abi a hard error.

On a release branch only. But, once a release branch is set, and the ABI
bits have been versioned, I'm for this.

>- Add option to run with multilibs: The problem is that some compilers
>  are multilib enabled, e.g. the MIPS compiler can support three
>  multilibs.  For others the multilibs are other archs, e.g. the
>  32-bit x86-64 multilib should have the same ABI as the i686
>  multilib.
>
>  Currently check-ABI is only run for the default ABI, the test is not
>  multi-lib aware.
>
>  I run on x86_64-linux-gnu the testsuite with
>   RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board 'unix{-m32,}'" 
>  in the environment to test both 32-bit x86 and 64-bit x86-64 code
>  generation.  This gives 32/ subdirectories when building and the
>  testsuite handles this fine.
>
>  My suggestion is to add MULTISUBDIR ("32/" for AMD64) to baseline_file in
>  aclocal.m4 and then create the special ABI and let us test it

Hmmm. This sounds good. Do you have this working?

best,
benjamin