search for: gbenerate

...39;d suggest > running some fixed number of random programs as part of the validation > suite. On a fastish quad core I can test about 25,000 programs in 24 The problem with random tests is that they're just that -- random. You can't have a known suite to validate with. Now, if we gbenerate some tests that cause things to fail and then add those to the LLVM test suite, I'd be all for it. > We've never tested llvm-gcc for x64 using random testing, doing this would > likely turn up a nice crop of bugs. Definitely. Random testing is certainly useful. Once random tests a...

Lately our random C program generator has seemed quite successful at catching regressions in llvm-gcc that the test suite misses. I'd suggest running some fixed number of random programs as part of the validation suite. On a fastish quad core I can test about 25,000 programs in 24 hours. Our hacked valgrind (which looks for volatile miscompilations) is a bottleneck, leaving this out