This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: No way to scan-tree-dump .i01.cgraph?
- From: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>
- To: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>, Richard Guenther <rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 14:55:25 -0800
- Subject: Re: No way to scan-tree-dump .i01.cgraph?
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0502281702440.2297-100000@alwazn.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de> <1109611436.662.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050301182537.GA4832@us.ibm.com> <4224BDCD.30605@redhat.com> <1109788873.18683.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 11:41:13AM -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 14:09 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > Janis Johnson wrote:
> >
> > > I also find it annoying that the dump files aren't cleaned up. Should
> > > the dump files for failing tests be left, or would it be OK to remove
> > > all of them?
> > >
> > Much as I don't use the failing executables left behind by the
> > testsuite, I wouldn't use the dump files. They can be easily recreated.
> >
> > But, I can see valid reasons to wanting dump files for failing tests be
> > left behind. The dump files for successful should be removed, though.
>
> The problem with leaving failed dump files behind is that they can
> interfere with a following run of the testsuite (particularly if a pass
> is added/subtracted). I would vote strongly that the dump files for
> failing tests be removed.
I'm working on procs to be used in dg-final directives as:
{ dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "suffix" } }
{ dg-final { cleanup-saved-temps } }
{ dg-final { cleanup-coverage-files } }
These are for use in each test that generates files that are currently
left cluttering up the build's gcc/testsuite directory. I've also got
changes to a couple hundred tests to use these new test directives.
Each proc removes files that were generated for the current test. Tests
that generate extra files already use dg-options to request those files,
so adding another test directive to clean them up doesn't seem like an
unreasonable burden.
Janis