Re: cc1 hog

[Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp dot com>]

On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Jeffrey A Law wrote:

>   In message <Pine.BSF.3.96.971007153646.19846L-100000@vespucci.advicom.net>you
>  write:
>   > The "universal" cap is useful and important.  it may be enough for
>   > c-torture but other freely available test suites may not be as good a
>   > fit.
> So true.

It is difficulat to set a cap for computationally heavy tests.  The
longest running (wall-time) tests in the Ada test suites tend to do
"delays" and you can say that test X is supposed to run for about Y
seconds with some confidence.  But I can't say this about the numeric
tests.

>   > I have spent a lot of time running the Ada Compiler Validation suite over
>   > the past year or so on CPU simulators.   There is a fairly large
>   > difference between the longest and shortest tests in this suite.  I have
>   > always regretted that I have had to use a single time/instruction limit
>   > for all tests in the suite.
> Simulators certainly complicate the problem.
> 
> We're currently using a pretty gross hack --- we set slow_simulator or
> some such, which causes some of the bigger tests in libstdc++/libio to
> be scaled down or skipped.

I have thought of identifying a couple of limits and have a table which
says high or low limit.  But it takes test management time.  

--joel