Ok, understood. I think I'd be OK with demoting these tests to the test-suite, and dealing with the slightly lower amount of testing that comes with it if it means we can keep the clang tests in a nice shape.
We'd need to ensure there were equivalent tests written that test only clang produced IR - many tests will have this already but some don't. James On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 at 19:51, Renato Golin <renato.go...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 1 December 2015 at 19:42, James Molloy <ja...@jamesmolloy.co.uk> wrote: > > Why do you think it would be non trivial? Some simple lit tests aren't > > exactly arduous on most targets. > > I mean having more points in the testing matrix. > > Clang check-all is cheaper than running the test-suite, but if we > start moving more tests to the suite, we'll have to run it for more > combinations. For slow targets, that mostly means a new buildbot, > because you want the "fast" check-all to not be impeded by the "slow" > test-suite for every commit. > > The "non-trivial" amount is the sole difference in how many machines > you can get to have a reasonable amount of commits in the blame-list > for everything we test, which is trivial on fast x86_64 servers. > > --renato >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
