On Tue, 18 Dec 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Yes, take g++.dg/tree-prof/morefunc.C as an example:
> > - int i;
> > - for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
> > + int i, j;
> > + for (i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
> > + for (j = 0; j < 50; j++)
> > g += tc->foo();
> > if (g<100) g++;
> > }
> > @@ -27,8 +28,9 @@ void test1 (A *tc)
> > static __attribute__((always_inline))
> > void test2 (B *tc)
> > {
> > - int i;
> > + int i, j;
> > for (i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
> > + for (j = 0; j < 50; j++)
> >
> > I have to increase loop count like this to get stable pass on my
> > machine. The original count (1000) is too small to be sampled.
>
> IIRC It was originally higher, but people running on slow simulators
> complained,
> so it was reduced. Perhaps we need some way to detect in the test suite
> that the test runs on a real CPU.
Doesn't check_effective_target_simulator work here?
See e.g. libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/heap/moveable2.cc
for an example.
brgds, H-P
