Craig Topper via llvm-dev
2021-Feb-01 23:19 UTC
[llvm-dev] Conflicting check prefix detection not working in update_llc_test_checks.py?
Yes, that matches my expectations. Thanks! ~Craig On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 3:05 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote:> Indeed, we're now not output-ing the case where some functions have > conflicting asm, just the case when all functions lose their asm. > > I have a fix ready; to confirm, for this example (i.e. taking all (both) > the "--check-prefix"-es in alu32.ll), would this output match your > expectations? > > WARNING: Function slti had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function sltiu had conflicting output from different RUN lines > for prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function srli had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function srai had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function add had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function sub had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function sll had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function slt had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function sltu had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function srl had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > WARNING: Function sra had conflicting output from different RUN lines for > prefix CHECK > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:12 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > >> looking >> >> On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:11 PM Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> update_llc_test_checks.py seems to not be telling me about assembly that >>> differs under the same prefix anymore. >>> >>> An easy way to see this is to just remove the --check-prefix from >>> test/CodeGen/RISCV/alu32.ll and run the script. You'll get no error about >>> conflicts. And if you look at the resulting file only some functions will >>> have been updated to use CHECK as the prefix. >>> >>> Reverting some commits to update_llc_test_checks.py suggest this may >>> have been broken by e2dc306b1ac71258e6ce40a66e778527f282c355 [utils] Fix >>> UpdateTestChecks case where 2 runs differ for last label >>> >>> ~Craig >>> >>-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210201/f0da8490/attachment-0001.html>
Craig Topper via llvm-dev
2021-Feb-03 05:34 UTC
[llvm-dev] Conflicting check prefix detection not working in update_llc_test_checks.py?
Hi Mircea, It looks like the script is now reporting warnings even when there is a set of prefixes to update the test for all functions. For example, if you add -check-prefixes=CHECK,RV32I to the first command in alu32.ll and -check-prefixes=CHECK,RV64I to the second you'll get this, but it looks like there's a valid solution for the test and no user intervention is required. WARNING: Function slti had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function sltiu had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function srli had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function srai had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function add had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function sub had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function sll had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function slt had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function sltu had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function srl had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK WARNING: Function sra had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK ~Craig On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 3:19 PM Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> wrote:> Yes, that matches my expectations. Thanks! > > ~Craig > > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 3:05 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: > >> Indeed, we're now not output-ing the case where some functions have >> conflicting asm, just the case when all functions lose their asm. >> >> I have a fix ready; to confirm, for this example (i.e. taking all (both) >> the "--check-prefix"-es in alu32.ll), would this output match your >> expectations? >> >> WARNING: Function slti had conflicting output from different RUN lines >> for prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function sltiu had conflicting output from different RUN lines >> for prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function srli had conflicting output from different RUN lines >> for prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function srai had conflicting output from different RUN lines >> for prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function add had conflicting output from different RUN lines for >> prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function sub had conflicting output from different RUN lines for >> prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function sll had conflicting output from different RUN lines for >> prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function slt had conflicting output from different RUN lines for >> prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function sltu had conflicting output from different RUN lines >> for prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function srl had conflicting output from different RUN lines for >> prefix CHECK >> WARNING: Function sra had conflicting output from different RUN lines for >> prefix CHECK >> >> On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:12 PM Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote: >> >>> looking >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:11 PM Craig Topper <craig.topper at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> update_llc_test_checks.py seems to not be telling me about assembly >>>> that differs under the same prefix anymore. >>>> >>>> An easy way to see this is to just remove the --check-prefix from >>>> test/CodeGen/RISCV/alu32.ll and run the script. You'll get no error about >>>> conflicts. And if you look at the resulting file only some functions will >>>> have been updated to use CHECK as the prefix. >>>> >>>> Reverting some commits to update_llc_test_checks.py suggest this may >>>> have been broken by e2dc306b1ac71258e6ce40a66e778527f282c355 [utils] Fix >>>> UpdateTestChecks case where 2 runs differ for last label >>>> >>>> ~Craig >>>> >>>-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210202/837030ec/attachment.html>