On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 09:04:53AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> writes: > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 09:40:35AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> I guess there's a possibility that some tests happen to pass already > >> on some targets. That's more likely with middle-end and backend bugs > >> rather than frontend stuff though. Perhaps for those it would make > >> sense to have a convention in which the failing testcase is restricted > >> (at the whole-test level) to the targets that the person committing the > >> testcase has actually tried. Maybe with a comment on the dg-ice etc. > >> to remind people to reconsider the main target selector when un-XFAILing > >> the test. > > > > Interesting point. With my frontend hat on, I hadn't really thought of > > this much, but the dg-ice directive allows you to specify the targets and > > specific options when to expect an ICE. So you could run a test everywhere > > but only expect an ICE on aarch64. > > Yeah. But the problem I was thinking of was: whoever adds the test > will only test on a subset of targets. If the test runs for all targets, > the dg-ice condition has to be exact for all targets too. Missing out > one target will generate a new FAIL, while adding a target unnecessarily > will generate an XPASS. So I think the condition has to be applied at > a whole-test level instead, unless the person committing the test is > confident about which targets are and aren't affected. > > (The same goes for other directives, dg-ice is just an example.)
Ah, got it. Thanks for the explanation. Marek
