| Message ID | CAFULd4YGSDgrW_3vFJOqLCSkkf1WdKCRF+s15BrjBvBQFd8X7Q@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello! > > The testcase still fails on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with: > > FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c scan-tree-dump-times vrp1 "link_error" 1 > > since there are two calls to link_error. Oops. I wonder how I did not see those failures myself ... Richard. > 2012-06-17 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> > > * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c: Fix scan-tree-dump-times argument order. > > Committed to mainline SVN. > > Uros.
On 06/17/2012 05:03 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello! >> >> The testcase still fails on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with: >> >> FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c scan-tree-dump-times vrp1 "link_error" 1 >> >> since there are two calls to link_error. > > Oops. I wonder how I did not see those failures myself ... > > Richard. I'm confused about what this test is supposed to do. It uses "dg-do link" which means the compile (test for excess errors) will fail if there is a reference to link_error. There are two uses of scan-tree-dump-times for the same string in the same file, so one of those is guaranteed to fail. It looks like the scans aren't needed, and "dg-do link" is the thing that needs the xfail. Janis
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Janis Johnson <janis_johnson@mentor.com> wrote: > On 06/17/2012 05:03 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hello! >>> >>> The testcase still fails on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with: >>> >>> FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c scan-tree-dump-times vrp1 "link_error" 1 >>> >>> since there are two calls to link_error. >> >> Oops. I wonder how I did not see those failures myself ... >> >> Richard. > > I'm confused about what this test is supposed to do. It uses > "dg-do link" which means the compile (test for excess errors) will > fail if there is a reference to link_error. There are two uses of > scan-tree-dump-times for the same string in the same file, so one > of those is guaranteed to fail. It looks like the scans aren't > needed, and "dg-do link" is the thing that needs the xfail. No, the scan-tree-dump-times are supposed to catch that already VRP1 has done the optimization - it does not so fully, which is why I added the XFAILed scan-tree-dump-times. But we still catch that XFAILed case with subsequent optimizations so the link succeeds nevertheless. The testcase fails now, I must have broken the optimization somehow and I am looking into it. Richard. > Janis
Index: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c =================================================================== --- gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c (revision 188702) +++ gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c (working copy) @@ -19,6 +19,6 @@ merging [1, 5] with ~[0, 6] so the first VRP pass can only eliminate the ~[0, 0] check as redundant. */ -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vrp1" 0 "link_error" { xfail *-*-* } } } */ -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "vrp1" 1 "link_error" } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "link_error" 0 "vrp1" { xfail *-*-* } } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "link_error" 1 "vrp1" } } */ /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "vrp1" } } */