dejagnu
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Excluding FAILs from UNSUPPORTED test cases


From: Jacob Bachmeyer
Subject: Re: Excluding FAILs from UNSUPPORTED test cases
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 19:05:35 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090807 SeaMonkey/1.1.17 Mnenhy/0.7.6.0

Arsen Arsenović wrote:
On Friday, 30 September 2022 04:02:25 CEST Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
Please keep me informed about the results of looking into those; if
this has actually exposed bugs in the GCC testsuite, I may add (as a
testsuite debugging aid) an option to run ${tool}-dg-prune in an
extra pass before analyzing the output.  I am tentatively considering
a variable DG_PRUNE_EARLY_AND_OFTEN that could be set on the runtest
command line to arrange for this.
I think this is actually a false positive when comparing, as it was an XFAIL turned into an XPASS (but, again, it was attempting to detect a note: that got pruned because pruning happened earlier). There's five relevant files, if you'd like to look yourself, in the gcc/testsuite directory inside the GCC tree:
- c-c++-common/pr69543-3.c
- g++.dg/other/error8.C
- g++.dg/template/dtor7.C
- g++.old-deja/g++.pt/overload7.C
- gcc.dg/uninit-pr89230-1.c

This suggests that early pruning would actually hide bugs in GCC: if the compiler is not supposed to produce the message in question, then pruning it causes the test to spuriously pass and the XFAIL result is correct. (I have not yet developed the level of skill to do much more on GCC than building and using it, so I am afraid that those tests are not particularly meaningful to me. :-/ )

Or did early pruning expose a bug in the GCC testsuite: the pruning function is overzealous and removes messages that GCC should not have produced and therefore should have been left for DejaGnu to detect?

[...]
My apologies for the delay:  developing unit tests for dg.exp has
proven to be more involved than initially expected.  (Starting with
writing a pure-Tcl VFS shim for the internal unit test support
infrastructure because a getdirs test in utils.test will fail if any
more subtrees are added to testsuite/runtest.libs.  Why yes, I now
plan to eventually also make the other tests independent of the
actual filesystem now that I have had to write this shim.)
No worries!  That shim sounds quite neat.

If you want to see it, the shim (as it stands thus far) is in the DejaGnu repository at Savannah on the PR58065 branch; as of this writing, I have not yet committed the dg.test file that uses it.


-- Jacob



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]