On 11/20/19 11:08 PM, Strager Neds wrote: > While fixing some bugs in __attribute__((section)), I found it difficult > to write tests. Make testing easier: introduce the > scan-assembler-symbol-section and scan-symbol-section helpers. See > in-line documentation for details. > > Testing: > > * Run `make check` on x86_64-linux-gnu with --disable-multilib > --enable-checking=release --enable-languages=c,c++. Observe no new > failures in test results. > * Run `make check` on macOS x86_64-apple-darwin16.7.0 with > --disable-multilib --enable-checking=release --enable-languages=c,c++. > Observe no new failures in test results. > * Run test-framework.exp with CHECK_TEST_FRAMEWORK=1, and post-process > results with test-framework.awk. Observe no new failures test > results. > > 2019-11-12 Matthew Glazar <strager....@gmail.com> > > * gcc/testsuite/lib/scanasm.exp (dg-scan): Extract file globbing > code ... > (dg_glob_remote): ... into this new procedure. > (scan-assembler-symbol-section): Define. > (scan-symbol-section): Define.
[ ... ] So this was marginally painful due to the mangling from your mailer. But after a fair amount of hand-editing the patch file I got it to apply. I actually botched that ever-so-slightly resulting in pr25376 not being updated properly which the testsuite naturally complained about -- good ;-) The darwin test has changed slightly since you originally submitted this patch. Hopefully I updated that properly as well. I could then generate a fresh diff with proper formatting ;-) Things look generally OK. A few caveats worth mentioning. This may fail on targets that silently put certain objects into nonstandard sections. I don't think that's a problem with your patch, but more a note that it's likely someone could write a test with this new bit of framework and find that it fails on some targets. I did throw this into my tester just to see if any of the existing tests might tickle this issue on one of the crosses, but it didn't flag anything (well, there is one msp430 failure, but I'm pretty sure that's not your change). I worry a bit about the less common native targets -- aix, hpux and the like. But testing them is too painful to contemplate these days. I'm sure those with access to suitable hardware will chime in if something is amiss. I'm going to go ahead and push the patch to the trunk. Thanks again for your patience. jeff
