llvm dev - Oct 2010 - [LLVMdev] Running "make check" on Windows yields lots of unwarrented unexpected failures (HTML free this time:-)

Hi,

sorry, in my last mail, I didn't check in time that HTML e-mails would 
be turned off.
So, checking out llvm/clang yesterday under Win32, building it, and 
running the "check"-project using MS Visual Studio yielded 177 
unexpected failures, many of which happen because of the different
registers used in passing arguments under Win64 and everybody else
on x86-64.
I would be willing to provide patches for these tests, but I would like
to know if there is a preferred solution.
I see the following approaches:
1. Add a working triple (like x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) to the failing tests.
2. Basically like 1., but add another test line for the registers used
    in Win64.
3. XFAIL the test for Win64 (or in that case: mingw64).
4. Relax the tested patterns, so that they accept (at least) both
    possible registers.

Again, sorry for the double-post.
Bye
Dirk

Dirk,

I am working on tests/win32(s) too.
I can let all tests pass on msvc10 and cygming with my patches,
thought, my patches are incomplete (several of them hide potential problems)

Please see threads below in llvm-commits.
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100927/109077.html
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20101004/109271.html

If you are ready to disclose your patches, please describe and post to
llvm-commits, thank you.
I will post mine in this week.

2010/10/31 Dirk Steinke <steinke.dirk.ml at
googlemail.com>:
> 1. Add a working triple (like x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) to the failing tests.
> 2. Basically like 1., but add another test line for the registers used
>    in Win64.
> 3. XFAIL the test for Win64 (or in that case: mingw64).
> 4. Relax the tested patterns, so that they accept (at least) both
>    possible registers.
We may be aware of win64. (2) and (4) are possible.


Thank you...Takumi

On 10/31/2010 04:25 PM, NAKAMURA Takumi wrote:
> Dirk,
>
> I am working on tests/win32(s) too.
> I can let all tests pass on msvc10 and cygming with my patches,
> thought, my patches are incomplete (several of them hide potential
problems)
>
> Please see threads below in llvm-commits.
>
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20100927/109077.html
>
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20101004/109271.html
>
> If you are ready to disclose your patches, please describe and post to
> llvm-commits, thank you.
> I will post mine in this week.
Hi Takumi,

thanks for pointing that thread out to me. This is basically what I
wanted to know.
Besides, if you are not satisfied with some of your changes because you 
see potential problems, then you should probably only commit those 
changes, which do not hide problems. My intention is (at the moment) 
only to fix those tests, which would pass if the argument registers 
didn't differ.
A test like e.g. codegen/x86/coalescer-commute2.ll cannot work the way 
it's designed to on Win64, so I guess it should be XFAILed on Win64, or 
the test has to be rewritten to not rely on having 128bit arguments 
passed in SSE registers. That's a tricky decision for each currently 
failing test. That's why I will look at those tests if the simple 
failures are fixed.
If I have anything ready, I'll put it up at llvm-commits for review. But 
I don't think I'll have enough time before the end of the week.
>
> 2010/10/31 Dirk Steinke<steinke.dirk.ml at googlemail.com>:
>> 1. Add a working triple (like x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) to the failing
tests.
>> 2. Basically like 1., but add another test line for the registers used
>>     in Win64.
>> 3. XFAIL the test for Win64 (or in that case: mingw64).
>> 4. Relax the tested patterns, so that they accept (at least) both
>>     possible registers.
>
> We may be aware of win64. (2) and (4) are possible.
Yes, I've seen that your proposed patches from the beginning of October 
used both approaches. It's certainly the best thing to do. So, I'll keep
that in mind.
>
>
> Thank you...Takumi
Bye
Dirk