On 6/6/11, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote: > So, I'm getting this: > > Running /home/dnovillo/pph/svn/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pph/pph.exp ...
13 years, 10 months ago
(2011-06-06 18:33:40 UTC)
#3
On 6/6/11, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote:
> So, I'm getting this:
>
> Running /home/dnovillo/pph/svn/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pph/pph.exp ...
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/c120060625-1.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/c1eabi1.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1autometh.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1functions.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1functions.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1special.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1special.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for bogus
> messages, line )
> FAIL: g++.dg/pph/x1special.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for excess
> errors)
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1template.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1template.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for
> bogus messages, line )
> FAIL: g++.dg/pph/x1template.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for excess
> errors)
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1tmplclass.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1tmplfunc.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1tmplfunc.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for
> bogus messages, line )
> FAIL: g++.dg/pph/x1tmplfunc.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for excess
> errors)
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1typerefs.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1variables.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1variables.cc -I. (test for bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1variables.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for
> bogus messages, line )
> XPASS: g++.dg/pph/x1variables.cc -fpph-map=pph.map -I. (test for
> bogus messages, line )
>
> === g++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 176
> # of unexpected failures 3
> # of unexpected successes 17
> # of expected failures 45
>
> The three FAILs are expected then? Those are the ones you mentioned
> can't be easily XFAIL'd?
These are probably changes in the line number of the ICE,
and so the dg-bogus needs updating.
--
Lawrence Crowl
After getting new failures due to an unrelated fix, I think this will be more ...
13 years, 10 months ago
(2011-06-07 18:43:31 UTC)
#4
After getting new failures due to an unrelated fix, I think this will
be more trouble than it's worth.
First, we can't get rid of the XPASSes, so those will always be noisy.
Second, some XPASSes will need to be unmarked because we just fixed
the underlying problem.
Third, we are at such an early stage, that fixes to a test case will
generally expose failures in other already failing tests, but these
failures will be in a different place. So more noise.
I really think that for now the easiest way to keep track of this is
to have a clean build to compare against.
Diego.
On 6/7/11, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote: > After getting new failures due to an unrelated ...
13 years, 10 months ago
(2011-06-08 21:09:34 UTC)
#5
On 6/7/11, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote:
> After getting new failures due to an unrelated fix, I think this will
> be more trouble than it's worth.
>
> First, we can't get rid of the XPASSes, so those will always be noisy.
Remove all the noise with:
sed -e '
/-fpph-map=pph.map/ ! {
/^XPASS: .*test for bogus messages/ d
/^XPASS: .*test for excess errors/ d
}
/^#/ p
/^ERROR: / p
/^XFAIL: / p
/^XPASS: / p
/^FAIL: / p
d
'
>
> Second, some XPASSes will need to be unmarked because we just fixed
> the underlying problem.
That is how we know that what progress we have made. These should
be reflected in the work list.
>
> Third, we are at such an early stage, that fixes to a test case will
> generally expose failures in other already failing tests, but these
> failures will be in a different place. So more noise.
That is now we expose remaining tasks. These should be reflected
in the work list.
>
> I really think that for now the easiest way to keep track of this is
> to have a clean build to compare against.
But the clean build isn't a decent comparison. The existing tools
only compare against whether or not tests fail. They fail to
report that a test failed for different reasons. Given that there
are only twelve tests for which there is a concern, I think we are
better off know where we are.
--
Lawrence Crowl
On 6/7/11, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote: > After getting new failures due to an unrelated ...
13 years, 10 months ago
(2011-06-08 21:16:49 UTC)
#6
On 6/7/11, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com> wrote:
> After getting new failures due to an unrelated fix, I think this will
> be more trouble than it's worth.
>
> First, we can't get rid of the XPASSes, so those will always be noisy.
Remove all the noise with:
sed -e '
/-fpph-map=pph.map/ ! {
/^XPASS: .*test for bogus messages/ d
/^XPASS: .*test for excess errors/ d
}
/^#/ p
/^ERROR: / p
/^XFAIL: / p
/^XPASS: / p
/^FAIL: / p
d
'
>
> Second, some XPASSes will need to be unmarked because we just fixed
> the underlying problem.
That is how we know that what progress we have made. These should
be reflected in the work list.
>
> Third, we are at such an early stage, that fixes to a test case will
> generally expose failures in other already failing tests, but these
> failures will be in a different place. So more noise.
That is now we expose remaining tasks. These should be reflected
in the work list.
>
> I really think that for now the easiest way to keep track of this is
> to have a clean build to compare against.
But the clean build isn't a decent comparison. The existing tools
only compare against whether or not tests fail. They fail to
report that a test failed for different reasons. Given that there
are only twelve tests for which there is a concern, I think we are
better off know where we are.
--
Lawrence Crowl
Issue 4572042: [pph] Clean up PPH tests
(Closed)
Created 13 years, 10 months ago by Lawrence Crowl
Modified 12 years, 10 months ago
Reviewers: Diego Novillo
Base URL: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/pph/
Comments: 0