Patchwork testsuite: missing or wrong dg-* directives?

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Harald Anlauf
Date Jan. 13, 2013, 8:30 p.m.
Message ID <50F31967.4050003@gmx.de>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/211650/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Harald Anlauf - Jan. 13, 2013, 8:30 p.m.
On 01/12/13 22:02, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Le 08/01/2013 22:32, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
>> On 12/28/12 21:49, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> is there a default directive that is assumed when the testsuite is run?
>>>
>>> Running an "fgrep -L" on the fortran testsuite, I found several files
>>> that are missing either dg-do compile or run.
>>>
>>> I also found a funny typo in gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90
>>> ! { do-do compile }
>>
>> find gfortran.dg -name "*.[fF]90" -o -name "*.[fF]" | \
>> xargs fgrep -w -L 'dg-do' | \
>> xargs head -1 -v
>>
>> and manual inspection of the resulting output results in:
>>
>> - Typos
>>
> [...]
>>
>> - Possibly missing { dg-do run }
>>
> [...]
>
> Mind sending patch and changelog to @gcc-patches ?
>

Here we go.  No failures, but additional passes because of the dg-do 
run's.  Somebody please take care of it?

Harald


2013-01-13  Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>

	* gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90: Add dg-do run.
	* gfortran.dg/bounds_check_4.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/inquire_10.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/minloc_3.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/module_double_reuse.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/mvbits_1.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/oldstyle_1.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/pr20163-2.f: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/save_1.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/scan_1.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/select_char_1.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/shape_4.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/coarray_29_2.f90: Fix dg-do directive.
	* gfortran.dg/function_optimize_10.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/used_types_17.f90: Likewise.
	* gfortran.dg/used_types_18.f90: Likewise.
Manfred Schwarb - Jan. 13, 2013, 11:10 p.m.
Am 13.01.2013 21:30, schrieb Harald Anlauf:
> On 01/12/13 22:02, Mikael Morin wrote:
>> Le 08/01/2013 22:32, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
>>> On 12/28/12 21:49, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> is there a default directive that is assumed when the testsuite is run?
>>>>
>>>> Running an "fgrep -L" on the fortran testsuite, I found several files
>>>> that are missing either dg-do compile or run.
>>>>
>>>> I also found a funny typo in gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90
>>>> ! { do-do compile }
>>>

There are several other oddities: d_g-final, braces have to be separated by spaces.
Not sure about the double braces in lto, I guess they act simply as single braces.

class_array_10.f03:! { dg-do compile}
coarray_lib_token_4.f90:! { d_g-final { scan-tree-dump-times "bar \\(&parm.\[0-9\]+, caf_token.\[0-9\]+, \\(\\(integer\\(kind=.\\) parm.\[0-9\]+.data - \\(integer\\(kind=.\\)\\) x.\[0-9\]+\\) \\+ caf_offset.\[0-9\]+\\);" 1 "original" } }
continuation_9.f90:! { dg-warning "not allowed by itself in line 3" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
continuation_9.f90:! { dg-warning "not allowed by itself in line 4" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
continuation_9.f90:! { dg-warning "not allowed by itself in line 5" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
extends_11.f03:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times " +recruit\\.service\\.education\\.person\\.ss =" 8 "original"} }
lto/20091016-1_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{-flto -g -fPIC -r -nostdlib} {-O -flto -g -fPIC -r -nostdlib}} }
lto/20100110-1_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O1 -flto }} }
lto/pr41521_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{-g -flto} {-g -O -flto}} }
lto/pr46036_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O -flto -ftree-vectorize }} }
lto/pr46629_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O2 -flto -ftree-vectorize -march=x86-64 }} { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } }
lto/pr46629_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O2 -flto -ftree-vectorize }} }
lto/pr46911_0.f:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O2 -flto -g }} }
lto/pr47839_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -g -flto }} }
move_alloc_13.f90:! { dg-do run}
structure_constructor_11.f90:! { dg-do run}
tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 10" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 11" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 8" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 9" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
vect/vect-2.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using versioning." 3 "vect" {target { vect_no_align || { { ! vector_alignment_reachable  } && { ! vect_hw_misalign } } } } } }
vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align || {! vector_alignment_reachable}} } } }
vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using versioning" 1 "vect" { target { {! vect_no_align} && { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } } }
vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 "vect" { xfail { { vect_no_align } || { ! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 2 "vect" { target { {! vect_no_align} && { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } } }
vect/vect-4.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 "vect" { xfail { { vect_no_align } || {! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
vect/vect-4.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 "vect" { xfail { { vect_no_align } || {! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
vect/vect-4.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 2 "vect" { target { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } }
vect/vect-5.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align || {! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
vect/vect-5.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using versioning." 1 "vect" { target { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } }
warning-directive-2.F90:! { dg-message "some warnings being treated as errors" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }


cheers,
Manfred



>>> find gfortran.dg -name "*.[fF]90" -o -name "*.[fF]" | \
>>> xargs fgrep -w -L 'dg-do' | \
>>> xargs head -1 -v
>>>
>>> and manual inspection of the resulting output results in:
>>>
>>> - Typos
>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> - Possibly missing { dg-do run }
>>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Mind sending patch and changelog to @gcc-patches ?
>>
>
> Here we go.  No failures, but additional passes because of the dg-do run's.  Somebody please take care of it?
>
> Harald
>
>
> 2013-01-13  Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
>
>      * gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90: Add dg-do run.
>      * gfortran.dg/bounds_check_4.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/inquire_10.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/minloc_3.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/module_double_reuse.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/mvbits_1.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/oldstyle_1.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/pr20163-2.f: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/save_1.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/scan_1.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/select_char_1.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/shape_4.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/coarray_29_2.f90: Fix dg-do directive.
>      * gfortran.dg/function_optimize_10.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/used_types_17.f90: Likewise.
>      * gfortran.dg/used_types_18.f90: Likewise.
>
Manfred Schwarb - Jan. 13, 2013, 11:37 p.m.
Am 14.01.2013 00:10, schrieb Manfred Schwarb:
> Am 13.01.2013 21:30, schrieb Harald Anlauf:
>> On 01/12/13 22:02, Mikael Morin wrote:
>>> Le 08/01/2013 22:32, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
>>>> On 12/28/12 21:49, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>
>>>>> is there a default directive that is assumed when the testsuite is run?
>>>>>
>>>>> Running an "fgrep -L" on the fortran testsuite, I found several files
>>>>> that are missing either dg-do compile or run.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also found a funny typo in gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90
>>>>> ! { do-do compile }
>>>>
>
> There are several other oddities: d_g-final, braces have to be separated by spaces.
> Not sure about the double braces in lto, I guess they act simply as single braces.
>


Oh, and then there is the "dg-do  run" hack (two spaces, see cray_pointers_2.f90).
I guess the other occurrences are not intended:

default_initialization_5.f90:! { dg-do  run }
io_real_boz_3.f90:! { dg-do  run }
io_real_boz_4.f90:! { dg-do  run }
io_real_boz_5.f90:! { dg-do  run }


> class_array_10.f03:! { dg-do compile}
> coarray_lib_token_4.f90:! { d_g-final { scan-tree-dump-times "bar \\(&parm.\[0-9\]+, caf_token.\[0-9\]+, \\(\\(integer\\(kind=.\\) parm.\[0-9\]+.data - \\(integer\\(kind=.\\)\\) x.\[0-9\]+\\) \\+ caf_offset.\[0-9\]+\\);" 1 "original" } }
> continuation_9.f90:! { dg-warning "not allowed by itself in line 3" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
> continuation_9.f90:! { dg-warning "not allowed by itself in line 4" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
> continuation_9.f90:! { dg-warning "not allowed by itself in line 5" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
> extends_11.f03:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times " +recruit\\.service\\.education\\.person\\.ss =" 8 "original"} }
> lto/20091016-1_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{-flto -g -fPIC -r -nostdlib} {-O -flto -g -fPIC -r -nostdlib}} }
> lto/20100110-1_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O1 -flto }} }
> lto/pr41521_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{-g -flto} {-g -O -flto}} }
> lto/pr46036_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O -flto -ftree-vectorize }} }
> lto/pr46629_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O2 -flto -ftree-vectorize -march=x86-64 }} { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } }
> lto/pr46629_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O2 -flto -ftree-vectorize }} }
> lto/pr46911_0.f:! { dg-lto-options {{ -O2 -flto -g }} }
> lto/pr47839_0.f90:! { dg-lto-options {{ -g -flto }} }
> move_alloc_13.f90:! { dg-do run}
> structure_constructor_11.f90:! { dg-do run}
> tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 10" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
> tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 11" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
> tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 8" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
> tab_continuation.f:! { dg-warning "Nonconforming tab character in column 1 of line 9" "Nonconforming tab" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
> vect/vect-2.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using versioning." 3 "vect" {target { vect_no_align || { { ! vector_alignment_reachable  } && { ! vect_hw_misalign } } } } } }
> vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align || {! vector_alignment_reachable}} } } }
> vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using versioning" 1 "vect" { target { {! vect_no_align} && { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } } }
> vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 "vect" { xfail { { vect_no_align } || { ! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
> vect/vect-3.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 2 "vect" { target { {! vect_no_align} && { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } } }
> vect/vect-4.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 "vect" { xfail { { vect_no_align } || {! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
> vect/vect-4.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 1 "vect" { xfail { { vect_no_align } || {! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
> vect/vect-4.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Vectorizing an unaligned access" 2 "vect" { target { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } }
> vect/vect-5.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using peeling" 1 "vect" { xfail { vect_no_align || {! vector_alignment_reachable} } } } }
> vect/vect-5.f90:! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Alignment of access forced using versioning." 1 "vect" { target { {! vector_alignment_reachable} && {! vect_hw_misalign} } } } }
> warning-directive-2.F90:! { dg-message "some warnings being treated as errors" "" {target "*-*-*"} 0 }
>
>
> cheers,
> Manfred
>
>
>
>>>> find gfortran.dg -name "*.[fF]90" -o -name "*.[fF]" | \
>>>> xargs fgrep -w -L 'dg-do' | \
>>>> xargs head -1 -v
>>>>
>>>> and manual inspection of the resulting output results in:
>>>>
>>>> - Typos
>>>>
>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> - Possibly missing { dg-do run }
>>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Mind sending patch and changelog to @gcc-patches ?
>>>
>>
>> Here we go.  No failures, but additional passes because of the dg-do run's.  Somebody please take care of it?
>>
>> Harald
>>
>>
>> 2013-01-13  Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>
>>
>>      * gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90: Add dg-do run.
>>      * gfortran.dg/bounds_check_4.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/inquire_10.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/minloc_3.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/module_double_reuse.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/mvbits_1.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/oldstyle_1.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/pr20163-2.f: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/save_1.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/scan_1.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/select_char_1.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/shape_4.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/coarray_29_2.f90: Fix dg-do directive.
>>      * gfortran.dg/function_optimize_10.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/used_types_17.f90: Likewise.
>>      * gfortran.dg/used_types_18.f90: Likewise.
>>
>
>
Mikael Morin - Jan. 14, 2013, 2:05 p.m.
Le 13/01/2013 21:30, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
> On 01/12/13 22:02, Mikael Morin wrote:
>> Le 08/01/2013 22:32, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
>>> On 12/28/12 21:49, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> is there a default directive that is assumed when the testsuite is run?
>>>>
>>>> Running an "fgrep -L" on the fortran testsuite, I found several files
>>>> that are missing either dg-do compile or run.
>>>>
>>>> I also found a funny typo in gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90
>>>> ! { do-do compile }
>>>
>>> find gfortran.dg -name "*.[fF]90" -o -name "*.[fF]" | \
>>> xargs fgrep -w -L 'dg-do' | \
>>> xargs head -1 -v
>>>
>>> and manual inspection of the resulting output results in:
>>>
>>> - Typos
>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> - Possibly missing { dg-do run }
>>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Mind sending patch and changelog to @gcc-patches ?
>>
>
> Here we go. No failures, but additional passes because of the dg-do
> run's. Somebody please take care of it?
>
Thanks.  Committed as revision 195146.

Mikael
Mikael Morin - Jan. 14, 2013, 2:23 p.m.
Le 14/01/2013 00:37, Manfred Schwarb a écrit :
> Am 14.01.2013 00:10, schrieb Manfred Schwarb:
>>
>> There are several other oddities: d_g-final, braces have to be
>> separated by spaces.

Want to send a patch?

>> Not sure about the double braces in lto, I guess they act simply as
>> single braces.

I don't know, you may ask a testsuite maintainer, or the author.  It is 
unlikely though that the author made a typo at the opening brace _and_ 
at the closing one.

Mikael
Mike Stump - Jan. 14, 2013, 7:49 p.m.
On Jan 14, 2013, at 6:23 AM, Mikael Morin <mikael.morin@sfr.fr> wrote:
> Le 14/01/2013 00:37, Manfred Schwarb a écrit :
>> Am 14.01.2013 00:10, schrieb Manfred Schwarb:
>>> 
>>> There are several other oddities: d_g-final, braces have to be
>>> separated by spaces.
> 
> Want to send a patch?
> 
>>> Not sure about the double braces in lto, I guess they act simply as
>>> single braces.
> 
> I don't know, you may ask a testsuite maintainer, or the author.  It is unlikely though that the author made a typo at the opening brace _and_ at the closing one.

Yeah…  A quick check of the _documentation_ (a terrible thing to waste):

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.5.4/gccint/LTO-Testing.html

{ dg-lto-options { { options } [{ options }] } [{ target selector }]}
This directive provides a list of one or more sets of compiler options to override LTO_OPTIONS. Each test will be compiled and run with each of these sets of options.
Manfred Schwarb - Jan. 15, 2013, 9:47 p.m.
Am 14.01.2013 20:49, schrieb Mike Stump:
> On Jan 14, 2013, at 6:23 AM, Mikael Morin <mikael.morin@sfr.fr> wrote:
>> Le 14/01/2013 00:37, Manfred Schwarb a écrit :
>>> Am 14.01.2013 00:10, schrieb Manfred Schwarb:
>>>>
>>>> There are several other oddities: d_g-final, braces have to be
>>>> separated by spaces.
>>
>> Want to send a patch?
>>
>>>> Not sure about the double braces in lto, I guess they act simply as
>>>> single braces.
>>
>> I don't know, you may ask a testsuite maintainer, or the author.  It is unlikely though that the author made a typo at the opening brace _and_ at the closing one.
>
> Yeah…  A quick check of the _documentation_ (a terrible thing to waste):
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.5.4/gccint/LTO-Testing.html

Sorry, I just realized that my sentence was not really clear. I was not talking
about removing superfluous braces, but about adding spaces between these double braces.

dejagnu seems to be very sensitive concerning missing spaces, e.g.
"{ dg-do run}" does silently nothing, it only works if you write it as
"{ dg-do run }".


Manfred

>
> { dg-lto-options { { options } [{ options }] } [{ target selector }]}
> This directive provides a list of one or more sets of compiler options to override LTO_OPTIONS. Each test will be compiled and run with each of these sets of options.
>

Patch

Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/oldstyle_1.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/oldstyle_1.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/oldstyle_1.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
       integer i, j /1/, g/2/, h ! { dg-warning "" "" }
       integer k, l(3) /2*2,1/   ! { dg-warning "" "" }
       real pi /3.1416/, e       ! { dg-warning "" "" }
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/scan_1.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/scan_1.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/scan_1.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 program b
    integer w
    character(len=2) s, t
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/aint_anint_1.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 program aint_anint_1
     
   implicit none
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/appendix-a/a.11.2.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ 
-! { do-do compile }
+! { dg-do compile }
 
       SUBROUTINE A11_2(AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, N)
       INTEGER N
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/bounds_check_4.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/bounds_check_4.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/bounds_check_4.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 subroutine foo(n,x)
   implicit none
   integer, intent(in) :: n
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/save_1.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/save_1.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/save_1.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 ! { dg-options "-O2 -fno-automatic" }
       subroutine foo (b)
 	logical b
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/coarray_29_2.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/coarray_29_2.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/coarray_29_2.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ 
-! { dg-compile }
+! { dg-do compile }
 ! { dg-options "-fcoarray=single" }
 
 ! Requires that coarray_29.f90 has been compiled before
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr20163-2.f
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr20163-2.f	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr20163-2.f	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
        open(10,status="foo",err=100) ! { dg-warning "STATUS specifier in OPEN statement .* has invalid value" }
        call abort
   100  continue
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/minloc_3.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/minloc_3.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/minloc_3.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
   real :: a(30), m
   real, allocatable :: c(:)
   integer :: e(30), n, ia(1)
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/used_types_18.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/used_types_18.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/used_types_18.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ 
-! { dg do-compile }
+! { dg-do compile }
 ! { dg-options "-std=f2003" }
 !
 ! Fortran 2003 allowes TYPE without components
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_char_1.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_char_1.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_char_1.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 integer function char_select (s)
   character(len=*), intent(in) :: s
 
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/minlocval_3.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
   real :: a(30), b(10, 10), m
   real, allocatable :: c(:), d(:, :)
   integer :: e(30), f(10, 10), n
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/function_optimize_10.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/function_optimize_10.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/function_optimize_10.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ 
-! { do-do run }
+! { dg-do run }
 ! PR 51858 - this used to generate wrong code.
 ! Original test case by Don Simons.
 
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/inquire_10.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/inquire_10.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/inquire_10.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
   character(len=800) :: cwd
   integer :: unit
 
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/module_double_reuse.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/module_double_reuse.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/module_double_reuse.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 ! Test of fix for PR18878
 !
 ! Based on example in PR by Steve Kargl
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/mvbits_1.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/mvbits_1.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/mvbits_1.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 ! PR 25577
 ! MVBITS didn't work correctly for integer types wider than a C int
 ! The testcase is based on the one Dale Ranta posted in the bug report
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/shape_4.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/shape_4.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/shape_4.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 
+! { dg-do run }
 ! PR 35001 - we need to return 0 for the shapes of
 ! negative extents.  Test case adapted from Tobias Burnus.
 program main
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/used_types_17.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/used_types_17.f90	(revision 195136)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/used_types_17.f90	(working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ 
-! { dg do-compile }
+! { dg-do compile }
 ! Tests the fix for PR31630, in which the association of the argument
 ! of 'cmp' did not work.
 !