| Message ID | 87y2u28b5g.fsf@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | RFA: Fix libiberty testsuite failure | expand |
Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> writes: > Hi Ian, > > The libiberty testsuite in the gcc mainline is currently failing on > the last test: > > FAIL at line 1452, options : > in: _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE > out: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), void>::type*) > exp: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), void>::type*) > > To me it looks like the expected demangling is incorrect - it wants a > double set of parentheses around decltype(nullptr) when I think that > only one is needed. So I would like to apply the patch below to fix > this. > > Is this OK ? Looks like this problem was introduced by 2019-11-04 Kamlesh Kumar <kamleshbhalui@gmail.com> * cp-demangle.c (d_expr_primary): Handle nullptr demangling. * testsuite/demangle-expected: Added test. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg00064.html Kamlesh, Jason, can you confirm that Nick's change to the testsuite is testing the expected demangling, and that the current entry in the testsuite is incorrect? Thanks. Ian > libiberty/ChangeLog > 2020-01-20 Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> > > * testsuite/demangle-expected: Fix expected demangling. > > Index: libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected > =================================================================== > --- libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (revision 280157) > +++ libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (working copy) > @@ -1449,4 +1449,4 @@ > #PR91979 demangling nullptr expression > > _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE > -void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), void>::type*) > +void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), void>::type*)
yes, current expected entry is wrong and Nick's patch corrects that. ./kamlesh On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 9:29 PM Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com> wrote: > Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> writes: > > > Hi Ian, > > > > The libiberty testsuite in the gcc mainline is currently failing on > > the last test: > > > > FAIL at line 1452, options : > > in: _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE > > out: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), > void>::type*) > > exp: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), > void>::type*) > > > > To me it looks like the expected demangling is incorrect - it wants a > > double set of parentheses around decltype(nullptr) when I think that > > only one is needed. So I would like to apply the patch below to fix > > this. > > > > Is this OK ? > > Looks like this problem was introduced by > > 2019-11-04 Kamlesh Kumar <kamleshbhalui@gmail.com> > > * cp-demangle.c (d_expr_primary): Handle > nullptr demangling. > * testsuite/demangle-expected: Added test. > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg00064.html > > Kamlesh, Jason, can you confirm that Nick's change to the testsuite is > testing the expected demangling, and that the current entry in the > testsuite is incorrect? Thanks. > > Ian > > > > libiberty/ChangeLog > > 2020-01-20 Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> > > > > * testsuite/demangle-expected: Fix expected demangling. > > > > Index: libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected > > =================================================================== > > --- libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (revision 280157) > > +++ libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (working copy) > > @@ -1449,4 +1449,4 @@ > > #PR91979 demangling nullptr expression > > > > _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE > > -void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), > void>::type*) > > +void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), > void>::type*) >
kamlesh kumar <kamleshbhalui@gmail.com> writes: > yes, current expected entry is wrong and > Nick's patch corrects that. Thanks. Nick, the patch is OK. Ian > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 9:29 PM Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com> wrote: > >> Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > Hi Ian, >> > >> > The libiberty testsuite in the gcc mainline is currently failing on >> > the last test: >> > >> > FAIL at line 1452, options : >> > in: _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE >> > out: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), >> void>::type*) >> > exp: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), >> void>::type*) >> > >> > To me it looks like the expected demangling is incorrect - it wants a >> > double set of parentheses around decltype(nullptr) when I think that >> > only one is needed. So I would like to apply the patch below to fix >> > this. >> > >> > Is this OK ? >> >> Looks like this problem was introduced by >> >> 2019-11-04 Kamlesh Kumar <kamleshbhalui@gmail.com> >> >> * cp-demangle.c (d_expr_primary): Handle >> nullptr demangling. >> * testsuite/demangle-expected: Added test. >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg00064.html >> >> Kamlesh, Jason, can you confirm that Nick's change to the testsuite is >> testing the expected demangling, and that the current entry in the >> testsuite is incorrect? Thanks. >> >> Ian >> >> >> > libiberty/ChangeLog >> > 2020-01-20 Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> >> > >> > * testsuite/demangle-expected: Fix expected demangling. >> > >> > Index: libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected >> > =================================================================== >> > --- libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (revision 280157) >> > +++ libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (working copy) >> > @@ -1449,4 +1449,4 @@ >> > #PR91979 demangling nullptr expression >> > >> > _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE >> > -void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), >> void>::type*) >> > +void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), >> void>::type*) >>
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 9:53 AM Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com> wrote: > > kamlesh kumar <kamleshbhalui@gmail.com> writes: > > > yes, current expected entry is wrong and > > Nick's patch corrects that. > > Thanks. Nick, the patch is OK. > > Ian > >> > libiberty/ChangeLog > >> > 2020-01-20 Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> > >> > > >> > * testsuite/demangle-expected: Fix expected demangling. > >> > > >> > Index: libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected > >> > =================================================================== > >> > --- libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (revision 280157) > >> > +++ libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (working copy) > >> > @@ -1449,4 +1449,4 @@ > >> > #PR91979 demangling nullptr expression > >> > > >> > _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE > >> > -void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), > >> void>::type*) > >> > +void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), > >> void>::type*) > >> I checked in the patch for Nick.
Index: libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected =================================================================== --- libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (revision 280157) +++ libiberty/testsuite/demangle-expected (working copy) @@ -1449,4 +1449,4 @@ #PR91979 demangling nullptr expression _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE -void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), void>::type*) +void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), void>::type*)
Hi Ian, The libiberty testsuite in the gcc mainline is currently failing on the last test: FAIL at line 1452, options : in: _Z3fooILPv0EEvPN9enable_ifIXeqT_LDnEEvE4typeE out: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==(decltype(nullptr)), void>::type*) exp: void foo<(void*)0>(enable_if<((void*)0)==((decltype(nullptr))), void>::type*) To me it looks like the expected demangling is incorrect - it wants a double set of parentheses around decltype(nullptr) when I think that only one is needed. So I would like to apply the patch below to fix this. Is this OK ? Cheers Nick libiberty/ChangeLog 2020-01-20 Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> * testsuite/demangle-expected: Fix expected demangling.