llvm dev - Apr 2014 - [LLVMdev] Need help reproducing a sanitizer buildbot failure

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com>
wrote:
>
> I wonder if we can configure the lit test runner to print the (tail of)
> test output on failure.
>
You'd have to teach FileCheck, actually, since it's the one that
consumes
stderr in this case.  Rather than doing that, why not use
*SAN_OPTIONS=log_file=blah.txt, and teach lit to dump that on failure?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140411/ca2d16f6/attachment.html>

On Apr 11, 2014, at 9:19 AM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:35 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at
google.com> wrote:
> I wonder if we can configure the lit test runner to print the (tail of)
test output on failure.
> 
> You'd have to teach FileCheck, actually, since it's the one that
consumes stderr in this case.  Rather than doing that, why not use
*SAN_OPTIONS=log_file=blah.txt, and teach lit to dump that on failure?
I wished in the recent past that FileCheck would print its input upon failure. 
It currently only prints a single line with “possible intended match: blah”
which may or may not be the line you’re interested in.  I can work on this if
people think that this would be a good feature.

Adam
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140411/87177bcc/attachment.html>

On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Adam Nemet <anemet at apple.com> wrote:
>
> I wished in the recent past that FileCheck would print its input upon
> failure.  It currently only prints a single line with "possible
intended
> match: blah" which may or may not be the line you're interested
in.  I can
> work on this if people think that this would be a good feature.
>
That would be great. I often find myself cutting and pasting the failed
command without the FileCheck pipe so that I can see exactly what failed.


Diego.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140411/a9617c54/attachment.html>