similar to: [LLVMdev] Regression tests now using pipefail

Hi Rafael, I think you saw my other e-mail, but just in case you haven't, do you have any thoughts about making this an option that could be easily disabled on the command line without maintaing a patch to lit? I think it would help out-of-tree target maintainers to transition, since I'm sure there will be a lot of similarly broken tests to fix. Stephen On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:56 PM,

We currently don't use pipefail when running test under make check. This has the undesirable property that it is really easy for tests to bitrot. For example, something like llc %s | FileCheck %s will still pass if llc crashes after printing what FileCheck was looking for. It is also easy to break the tests when refactoring. I have fixed tests that were doing %clang_cc1 -a-driver-options

> Hmm, I don't know LLVM's Makefile system well enough to know the > easiest way to implement an option; if it's non-trivial then maybe > it's not worth it. That is my impression at least. These errors are somewhat easy to introduce, but also easy to fix. > I also don't know the workflow of most people doing out-of-tree work, > so I'm not sure how much

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Rafael Espíndola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > > > Did this discussion ever get a conclusion? I support enabling > > pipefail. Fallout for out of tree users should be easy to fix. As we > > learned from LLVM tests, almost all tests that start to fail actually > > indicate a real problem that

> Ok, here is a strong LGTM. =] > > Please make the change, and do the following things to aid out-of-tree > maintainers: > > 1) Add a flag to lit and an option to configure/make (I don't care about > CMake here as that is much less frequently used for out-of-tree work) to > disable pipefail. > I have just fixed the last failures on windows. I have also added

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > We currently don't use pipefail when running test under make check. > This has the undesirable property that it is really easy for tests to > bitrot. Hi Rafael, Did this discussion ever get a conclusion? I support enabling pipefail. Fallout for out of tree users should be easy to fix.

I did an experiment just now with a test case like: // RUN: clang %s -S -emit-llvm -o %t.ll // RUN: llc %t.ll -o %t.s // RUN: FileCheck < %t.s %s ... // CHECK: ... And it worked. It seems clang does not take stdin as its input, so "clang < %s" fails. Meanwhile, both "llc < %t.ll" and "llc %t.ll" work. 2012/8/22 Triple Yang <triple.yang at

2012/8/22 Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com>: > the example is more like what i need,it is so nice. > but,i am indefinite if "RUN: FileCheck < %t.s %s" can pass,i > understand that t.s was translate from t.ll,%s means read the local > source,are they the same? %t indicates a temporary file for output. ".s" is just a suffix I used

hi,yang: thanks for your help! my net is so poor that i can not donwload your attachment. would you like to paste here,or send to my other email:200005275 at 163.com? yours changcheng On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Triple Yang <triple.yang at gmail.com> wrote: > Wang, > > Attachment is a simple example, you may put it in test/CodeGen, and run with > > llvm-lit C90 >

2012/8/21 Triple Yang <triple.yang at gmail.com>: > 2012/8/21 Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com>: >> Hi,Yang >> thanks for your entire answer,i will do it follow you. >> still another question puzzled me:i write a hello.c file like this: >> >> //RUN: llc -march=c < %s | FileCheck %s >> #include"stdio.h" >>

2012/8/21 Triple Yang <triple.yang at gmail.com>: > 2012/8/21 Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com>: >> Hi,Yang >> thanks for your entire answer,i will do it follow you. >> still another question puzzled me:i write a hello.c file like this: >> >> //RUN: llc -march=c < %s | FileCheck %s >> #include"stdio.h" >>

Hi,all: i have a question about llvm162227,recently i have a work about cBackend,i found a the Module data is different from llvm2.9,a pass named CBackendNameAllUsedStructsAndMergeFunctions() was removed.for this the module data can not be translated correctly. when i try to rewrite this pass,i found much interfaces of module have been changed. i write a test which contian a struct like this

hi,yang: another question，i write a test like this: /*****test start******/ ; RUN: llc -march=c < %s | FileCheck %s ; ModuleID = 'hello.c' target datalayout = "e-p:64:64:64-i1:8:8-i8:8:8-i16:16:16-i32:32:32-i64:64:64- f32:32:32-f64:64:64-v64:64:64-v128:128:128-a0:0:64-s0:64:64-f80:128:128- n8:16:32:64-S128" target triple = "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" @.str = private

hi,yang: i had realized the test. thanks for your help! yours, changcheng On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Triple Yang <triple.yang at gmail.com> wrote: > That example is a standalone one which means you can run it without > extra modification. > Feel free to try it. > > 2012/8/28 Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com>: >> hi,yang: >> sorry to

2012/8/21 Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com>: > Hi,Yang > thanks for your entire answer,i will do it follow you. > still another question puzzled me:i write a hello.c file like this: > > //RUN: llc -march=c < %s | FileCheck %s > #include"stdio.h" > > int main() { > printf ("Helloworld.\n"); > return 0; > } >

On 5 July 2013 00:15, Stephen Lin <swlin at post.harvard.edu> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > I think you saw my other e-mail, but just in case you haven't, do you > have any thoughts about making this an option that could be easily > disabled on the command line without maintaing a patch to lit? I think > it would help out-of-tree target maintainers to transition, since

hi,yang: how can i remove the temporary files? if i can remove them,all is ok! yours: changcheng On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com> wrote: > hi,yang: > sorry to trouble you another time,i used your example and it run > well,but a problem came,it create severel temporary files i chaged the > RUN: line but failed. > i changed

hi,Yang: if you can give me a examle,which check out a string(such as "abcd") from a file(such as aaa.c) with fileCheck? i tried to write it but failed. thanks for your help! best wished! changcheng On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Triple Yang <triple.yang at gmail.com> wrote: > I guess so. > FileCheck has powerful extensions than just matching some strings so that >

aha, that's quite straightforward. 2012/8/29 Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com>: > hi,yang: > i had delete the temporary files,sorry to trouble you. > it is so easy: // RUN: rm .... > > Regards > changcheng > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Changcheng Wang > <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com> wrote: >> hi,yang: >> how

aha,i add cBackend into llvm version 162227,my test run passed. it so hapyy! thanks for all of you! still a question: what does "; PR1028" means? best wishes, changcheng On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Changcheng Wang <changcheng at multicorewareinc.com> wrote: > hi,yang: > > thanks,i replaced "{helloworld}" with "helloworld" as you said,and the