Alexandre Ganea via llvm-dev
2021-Feb-05 20:47 UTC
[llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite
The debuginfo-test tests are failing for a long time for us too. I won't
have much time to fix them in the short term, but here's the errors I'm
seeing (James do you see the same thing on your end?):
Failed Tests (7):
debuginfo-tests ::
dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_program_state.cpp
debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_step_kinds.cpp
debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_step_order.cpp
debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_watch_type.cpp
debuginfo-tests ::
dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_watch_value.cpp
debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/unreachable.cpp
debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test
The first ones seem to be related to a missing Python library in my
installation:
F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe"
"F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py"
list-debuggers
dbgeng [dbgeng] YES (1)
lldb [lldb] NO (The system cannot find the file specified
["lldb.exe"])
vs2015 [Visual Studio 2015] NO (No module named 'win32com')
vs2017 [Visual Studio 2017] NO (No module named 'win32com')
vs2019 [Visual Studio 2019] NO (No module named 'win32com')
Which in turns generates this error:
F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe"
F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py test --fail-lt 1.0 -w
--builder clang-cl_vs2015 --debugger dbgeng --cflags "/Zi /Od"
--ldflags "/Zi" --
F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\feature_tests\commands\penalty\expect_watch_type.cpp
expect_watch_type.cpp: nan/nan (nan)
[F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\builder\scripts\windows\clang-cl_vs2015.bat:
failed with returncode 1. : The system cannot find the path specified.]
The last failure (dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test) is related to slash
vs. backslash:
F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe"
"F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py"
"--unittest=show-all"
test_get_script_environment (builder.Builder.TestBuilder) ... ok
test_parse_bad_whitespace (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
Throw exception when parsing badly formed whitespace. ... ok
test_parse_empty (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
Empty files are silently ignored. ... ok
test_parse_escaped (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
Escaped commands are ignored. ... ok
test_parse_good_whitespace (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
Try to emulate python whitespace rules ... ok
test_parse_inline (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
Commands can be embedded in other text. ... ok
test_parse_multi_line_comment (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
Multi-line commands can embed comments. ... ok
test_parse_share_line (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
More than one command can appear on one line. ... ok
test_add_breakpoint_no_source_root_dir (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
... ok
test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir
(debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL
test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir_slash_suffix
(debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... ok
test_get_step_info (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL
test_get_step_info_no_frames (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... ok
test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
... FAIL
test_did_you_mean (utils.ExtArgParse.TestExtArgumentParser) ... ok
test_PreserveAutoColors (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_auto (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_blue (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_default (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_green (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_red (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_tags (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_yellow (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
test_sanity (utils.UnitTests.TestUnitTests) ... ok
=====================================================================FAIL:
test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir
(debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py",
line 245, in test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir
self.assertEqual('some_file', self.dbg.breakpoint_file)
AssertionError: 'some_file' != '/some_file'
- some_file
+ /some_file
? +
=====================================================================FAIL:
test_get_step_info (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py",
line 268, in test_get_step_info
self.assertEqual([None, '/other/file',
'/my_root/some_file'],
AssertionError: Lists differ: [None, '/other/file',
'/my_root/some_file'] != [None, '\\other\\file',
'\\dbg\\some_file']
First differing element 1:
'/other/file'
'\\other\\file'
- [None, '/other/file', '/my_root/some_file']
+ [None, '\\other\\file', '\\dbg\\some_file']
=====================================================================FAIL:
test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py",
line 254, in test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir
self.assertEqual(['/root/some_file'],
AssertionError: Lists differ: ['/root/some_file'] !=
['\\root\\some_file']
First differing element 0:
'/root/some_file'
'\\root\\some_file'
- ['/root/some_file']
? ^ ^
+ ['\\root\\some_file']
? ^^ ^^
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 24 tests in 0.005s
FAILED (failures=3)
error: unit test failures
-----Message d'origine-----
De : llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> De la part de David
Blaikie via llvm-dev
Envoyé : February 5, 2021 1:50 PM
À : James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk>; Reid Kleckner
<rnk at google.com>; Amy Huang <akhuang at google.com>
Cc : llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; David Greene <greened at
obbligato.org>
Objet : Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite
Reid and Amy might have some context for Windows (though I don't know if any
Windows folks have done much with this test suite).
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 7:38 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:>
> Given that the debuginfo tests already have cross-project dependencies, I
figured I'd try adapting them instead. I've updated
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95339 accordingly. Ideally, I think making the
existing debug-info tests a subdirectory, and renaming the top-level directory,
might be a good idea, but I haven't really come to any conclusions about
that yet.
>
> I also found that several of the existing debuginfo-test tests fail for me.
Are these tests expected to work on Windows? If so, are there any slightly more
unusual prerequisites that I might be missing?
>
> What do people think?
>
> James
>
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 at 15:40, <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On
Behalf Of David
>> > Greene via llvm-dev
>> > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 10:29 AM
>> > To: jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk; llvm-dev
>> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite
>> >
>> > James Henderson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
writes:
>> >
>> > > Currently, there is no location where lit tests that use both
>> > > clang and
>> > LLD
>> > > can be put, whilst the llvm-symbolizer cases I’ve hit are
testing
>> > > llvm-symbolizer (and not LLD), so don’t really fit in the LLD
>> > > test
>> > suite. I
>> > > therefore have prototyped a lit test suite that would be part
of
>> > > the monorepo, and which can support tests that use elements
from
>> > > multiple projects - see
>> >
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://reviews.llvm.org/D95339__;!!Jmo
>> > ZiZGBv3
>> >
RvKRSx!vWidWrbKJid6-eIKVUT-dGDzcG-65TMZMzhyd33jgyBwi7p-JRSgFVZkxqKC
>> > vkqW4A$
>> > . Tests could be added to
>> > > this suite as needed. The suite is modelled as an additional
>> > > top-level directory, and is enabled by enabling the
>> > > “cross-project-tests” project
>> > in
>> > > CMake.
>> >
>> > This is fantastic!
>> >
>> > > Back in October 2019, there was an extensive discussion on
>> > > end-to-end testing and how to write them (starting from
>> > >
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-
>> >
dev/2019-October/063509.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!vWidWrbKJid6-eIKV
>> > UT- dGDzcG-65TMZMzhyd33jgyBwi7p-JRSgFVZkxqJU8k_M_Q$ ).
>> > > The suggestion was that these tests would be lit-based and
run as
>> > > part of check-all, and would not be inside the clang tree,
>> > > although there was some opposition. This concluded with a
round
>> > > table. Unfortunately, I am unaware of what the conclusion of
that
>> > > round table conversation was, so it’s possible that what I am
>> > > proposing is redundant/being worked on by someone else.
>> >
>> > I started that thread and IIRC we ended up with the suggestion
that
>> > such tests should live in test-suite. As you noted having tests
>> > separated from the monorepo is less than ideal. I haven't
done
>> > anything with this conclusion yet, mostly due to lack of time. If
>> > your proposal gains traction I would like to see if we could build
>> > end-to-end testing on top of it.
>> >
>> > > Additionally, I don’t consider all classes of tests that the
>> > > proposed lit suite would be useful for to be “end-to-end”
testing.
>> >
>> > Agreed. There are various classes of tests that could make use of
>> > your proposed layout, one of which is "end-to-end."
Your proposal
>> > doesn't provide end-to-end testing per se, but it does make
adding
>> > end-to-end tests later on more straightforward.
>> >
>> > -David
>>
>> I think a useful distinction here is that lit tests are generally
>> very focused on a specific feature/function, where test-suite has a
>> much broader scope. Another slice at it would be that lit tests tend
>> to be "regression" tests, while test-suite is more of an
"integration" suite.
>>
>> I am not a QA person so I may be abusing some of these terms, but
>> that's how I look at it. Sometimes writing that focused lit test
>> ends up depending on multiple tools, and the cross-project lit suite
>> would be a good place to drop those; debuginfo-tests is a prime
example.
>> --paulr
>>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
James Henderson via llvm-dev
2021-Feb-08 11:59 UTC
[llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite
I get 7 failures too, but it's not the same 7. I'm going to have a chat with some of my colleagues who work on the tool, to figure these out and will report back. Failed Tests (7): debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_paren.cpp debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_paren_mline.cpp debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_syntax.cpp debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_syntax_mline.cpp debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_type.cpp debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_type_mline.cpp debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 at 20:47, Alexandre Ganea <alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com> wrote:> The debuginfo-test tests are failing for a long time for us too. I won't > have much time to fix them in the short term, but here's the errors I'm > seeing (James do you see the same thing on your end?): > > Failed Tests (7): > debuginfo-tests :: > dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_program_state.cpp > debuginfo-tests :: > dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_step_kinds.cpp > debuginfo-tests :: > dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_step_order.cpp > debuginfo-tests :: > dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_watch_type.cpp > debuginfo-tests :: > dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_watch_value.cpp > debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/unreachable.cpp > debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test > > > The first ones seem to be related to a missing Python library in my > installation: > > F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe" > "F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py" list-debuggers > > dbgeng [dbgeng] YES (1) > lldb [lldb] NO (The system cannot find the file specified > ["lldb.exe"]) > vs2015 [Visual Studio 2015] NO (No module named 'win32com') > vs2017 [Visual Studio 2017] NO (No module named 'win32com') > vs2019 [Visual Studio 2019] NO (No module named 'win32com') > > > Which in turns generates this error: > > F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe" > F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py test --fail-lt 1.0 > -w --builder clang-cl_vs2015 --debugger dbgeng --cflags "/Zi /Od" --ldflags > "/Zi" -- > F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\feature_tests\commands\penalty\expect_watch_type.cpp > expect_watch_type.cpp: nan/nan (nan) > [F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\builder\scripts\windows\clang-cl_vs2015.bat: > failed with returncode 1. : The system cannot find the path specified.] > > > The last failure (dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test) is related to > slash vs. backslash: > > F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe" > "F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py" > "--unittest=show-all" > > test_get_script_environment (builder.Builder.TestBuilder) ... ok > test_parse_bad_whitespace (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand) > Throw exception when parsing badly formed whitespace. ... ok > test_parse_empty (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand) > Empty files are silently ignored. ... ok > test_parse_escaped (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand) > Escaped commands are ignored. ... ok > test_parse_good_whitespace (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand) > Try to emulate python whitespace rules ... ok > test_parse_inline (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand) > Commands can be embedded in other text. ... ok > test_parse_multi_line_comment (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand) > Multi-line commands can embed comments. ... ok > test_parse_share_line (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand) > More than one command can appear on one line. ... ok > test_add_breakpoint_no_source_root_dir > (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... ok > test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir > (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL > test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir_slash_suffix > (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... ok > test_get_step_info (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL > test_get_step_info_no_frames (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... > ok > test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir > (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL > test_did_you_mean (utils.ExtArgParse.TestExtArgumentParser) ... ok > test_PreserveAutoColors (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_auto (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_blue (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_default (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_green (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_red (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_tags (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_yellow (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok > test_sanity (utils.UnitTests.TestUnitTests) ... ok > > =====================================================================> FAIL: test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir > (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Traceback (most recent call last): > File > "F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py", > line 245, in test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir > self.assertEqual('some_file', self.dbg.breakpoint_file) > AssertionError: 'some_file' != '/some_file' > - some_file > + /some_file > ? + > > > =====================================================================> FAIL: test_get_step_info (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Traceback (most recent call last): > File > "F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py", > line 268, in test_get_step_info > self.assertEqual([None, '/other/file', '/my_root/some_file'], > AssertionError: Lists differ: [None, '/other/file', '/my_root/some_file'] > != [None, '\\other\\file', '\\dbg\\some_file'] > > First differing element 1: > '/other/file' > '\\other\\file' > > - [None, '/other/file', '/my_root/some_file'] > + [None, '\\other\\file', '\\dbg\\some_file'] > > =====================================================================> FAIL: test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir > (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Traceback (most recent call last): > File > "F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py", > line 254, in test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir > self.assertEqual(['/root/some_file'], > AssertionError: Lists differ: ['/root/some_file'] != ['\\root\\some_file'] > > First differing element 0: > '/root/some_file' > '\\root\\some_file' > > - ['/root/some_file'] > ? ^ ^ > > + ['\\root\\some_file'] > ? ^^ ^^ > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Ran 24 tests in 0.005s > > FAILED (failures=3) > > error: unit test failures > > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> De la part de David > Blaikie via llvm-dev > Envoyé : February 5, 2021 1:50 PM > À : James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk>; Reid Kleckner < > rnk at google.com>; Amy Huang <akhuang at google.com> > Cc : llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; David Greene < > greened at obbligato.org> > Objet : Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite > > Reid and Amy might have some context for Windows (though I don't know if > any Windows folks have done much with this test suite). > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 7:38 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > Given that the debuginfo tests already have cross-project dependencies, > I figured I'd try adapting them instead. I've updated > https://reviews.llvm.org/D95339 accordingly. Ideally, I think making the > existing debug-info tests a subdirectory, and renaming the top-level > directory, might be a good idea, but I haven't really come to any > conclusions about that yet. > > > > I also found that several of the existing debuginfo-test tests fail for > me. Are these tests expected to work on Windows? If so, are there any > slightly more unusual prerequisites that I might be missing? > > > > What do people think? > > > > James > > > > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 at 15:40, <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of David > >> > Greene via llvm-dev > >> > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 10:29 AM > >> > To: jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk; llvm-dev > >> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > >> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite > >> > > >> > James Henderson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > >> > > >> > > Currently, there is no location where lit tests that use both > >> > > clang and > >> > LLD > >> > > can be put, whilst the llvm-symbolizer cases I’ve hit are testing > >> > > llvm-symbolizer (and not LLD), so don’t really fit in the LLD > >> > > test > >> > suite. I > >> > > therefore have prototyped a lit test suite that would be part of > >> > > the monorepo, and which can support tests that use elements from > >> > > multiple projects - see > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://reviews.llvm.org/D95339__;!!Jmo > >> > ZiZGBv3 > >> > RvKRSx!vWidWrbKJid6-eIKVUT-dGDzcG-65TMZMzhyd33jgyBwi7p-JRSgFVZkxqKC > >> > vkqW4A$ > >> > . Tests could be added to > >> > > this suite as needed. The suite is modelled as an additional > >> > > top-level directory, and is enabled by enabling the > >> > > “cross-project-tests” project > >> > in > >> > > CMake. > >> > > >> > This is fantastic! > >> > > >> > > Back in October 2019, there was an extensive discussion on > >> > > end-to-end testing and how to write them (starting from > >> > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe- > >> > dev/2019-October/063509.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!vWidWrbKJid6-eIKV > >> > UT- dGDzcG-65TMZMzhyd33jgyBwi7p-JRSgFVZkxqJU8k_M_Q$ ). > >> > > The suggestion was that these tests would be lit-based and run as > >> > > part of check-all, and would not be inside the clang tree, > >> > > although there was some opposition. This concluded with a round > >> > > table. Unfortunately, I am unaware of what the conclusion of that > >> > > round table conversation was, so it’s possible that what I am > >> > > proposing is redundant/being worked on by someone else. > >> > > >> > I started that thread and IIRC we ended up with the suggestion that > >> > such tests should live in test-suite. As you noted having tests > >> > separated from the monorepo is less than ideal. I haven't done > >> > anything with this conclusion yet, mostly due to lack of time. If > >> > your proposal gains traction I would like to see if we could build > >> > end-to-end testing on top of it. > >> > > >> > > Additionally, I don’t consider all classes of tests that the > >> > > proposed lit suite would be useful for to be “end-to-end” testing. > >> > > >> > Agreed. There are various classes of tests that could make use of > >> > your proposed layout, one of which is "end-to-end." Your proposal > >> > doesn't provide end-to-end testing per se, but it does make adding > >> > end-to-end tests later on more straightforward. > >> > > >> > -David > >> > >> I think a useful distinction here is that lit tests are generally > >> very focused on a specific feature/function, where test-suite has a > >> much broader scope. Another slice at it would be that lit tests tend > >> to be "regression" tests, while test-suite is more of an "integration" > suite. > >> > >> I am not a QA person so I may be abusing some of these terms, but > >> that's how I look at it. Sometimes writing that focused lit test > >> ends up depending on multiple tools, and the cross-project lit suite > >> would be a good place to drop those; debuginfo-tests is a prime example. > >> --paulr > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210208/2d07e2aa/attachment.html>