llvm dev - Jan 2010 - [LLVMdev] status of EH tests in llvm test-suite

Hi,

 

I'm using the release version of llvm 2.6. In the
llvm/projects/test-suite directory, there are several tests that are
commented out from running, or not running via a define statement. In
particular, I am inquiring about the status of the EH tests since some
tests seem to be enabled to run by default, but some aren't. From
looking at your tests, I've noticed the following:

 

1) I can see that some EH tests are running by default:

SingleSource/Regression/C++/EH:

ConditionalExpr

ctor_dtor_count

ctor_dtor_count2

dead_try_block

exception_spec_test

function_try_block

simple_rethrow

simple_throw

throw_rethrow_test

 

 

2) The following test is commented out on purpose:

MultiSource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++-EH/spirit

 

Should this test still be commented out? It's actually has the most
lines of code of all your tests and seems quite useful. In addition, it
seems to work for us. Is there something wrong with this test (e.g.
buggy test?). Or is (or was) llvm buggy when running this test?

 

3) There are also tests (using the default configuration) that in the
Makefile specify  "REQUIRES_EH_SUPPORT=1" and seem to not run by
default:

 

SingleSource/UnitTests:

            SetjmpLongjmp/C++/C++Catch.cpp

            SetjmpLongjmp/C++/C/FarJump.c

            SetjmpLongjmp/C++/C/Looping.c

            SetjmpLongjmp/C++/C/MultipleSetjmp.c

            SetjmpLongjmp/C++/C/SimpleCTest.c

            SetjmpLongjmp/C++/C/WhileLoop.c

 

            SignlessTypes/cast-bug.c

            SignlessTypes/cast.cpp

            SignlessTypes/cast2.cpp

            SignlessTypes/ccc.c

            SignlessTypes/div.c

            SignlessTypes/factor.c

            SignlessTypes/rem.c

            SignlessTypes/shr.c

 

4) are the -enable-eh and/or -enable-eh-conditional-support flags still
needed? That is, to enable eh support, must one specify these flags? If
so, are these flags only given as an argument to llc? Or to
llvm-gcc/llvm-g++?

 

Thanks,

 

Jose

 

 

Jose Rangel

QA Engineer

Arxan Technologies, Inc.

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100122/596d84cd/attachment.html>

On Jan 22, 2010, at 3:01 PMPST, Jose Rangel wrote:
> 2) The following test is commented out on purpose:
> MultiSource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++-EH/spirit
>
> Should this test still be commented out? It’s actually has the most  
> lines of code of all your tests and seems quite useful. In addition,  
> it seems to work for us. Is there something wrong with this test  
> (e.g. buggy test?). Or is (or was) llvm buggy when running this test?
I looked at this at one point; it got very inconsistent failures in  
several different Darwin environments, both ppc and x86, both gcc and  
llvm-gcc.   It looked like a memory error of some kind, wild load or  
store somewhere, use-after-free, something like that.  It was not I  
who disabled it but my data led me to agree with that decision.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100122/d075d00f/attachment.html>

Hi Dale,

 

Thanks for replying. Concerning Darwin, I compiled this test on snow
leopard and ran it using rosetta (that is, using -arch ppc -m32). I will
try this later on leopard.

 

Thanks,

 

Jose

 

 

________________________________

From: Dale Johannesen [mailto:dalej at apple.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 3:10 PM
To: Jose Rangel
Cc: Dale Johannesen; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] status of EH tests in llvm test-suite

 

 

On Jan 22, 2010, at 3:01 PMPST, Jose Rangel wrote:

	

	2) The following test is commented out on purpose:

	MultiSource/Benchmarks/Misc-C++-EH/spirit

	 

	Should this test still be commented out? It's actually has the
most lines of code of all your tests and seems quite useful. In
addition, it seems to work for us. Is there something wrong with this
test (e.g. buggy test?). Or is (or was) llvm buggy when running this
test?

 

I looked at this at one point; it got very inconsistent failures in
several different Darwin environments, both ppc and x86, both gcc and
llvm-gcc.   It looked like a memory error of some kind, wild load or
store somewhere, use-after-free, something like that.  It was not I who
disabled it but my data led me to agree with that decision.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20100122/9cb55746/attachment.html>