Στις Πέμ, 10 Δεκ 2020 στις 7:42 π.μ., ο/η Dimitar Dimitrov <dimi...@dinux.eu>
έγραψε:

> On сряда, 9 декември 2020 г. 15:12:49 EET abebeos via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Essence:
> >
> > I need a confirmation that the testsuite setup as presented in:
> >
> > https://github.com/abebeos/avr-gnu
> >
> > works fine.
> >
> > The problem with the avr target is that the testsuite cannot be run
> easily,
> > mainly because of the need for a special simulated-target setup, which
> does
> > not work for avr as documented. This led developers to a dead-end with
> > their non-cc0-avr-backends (the non-cc0 backend is needed thus avr is not
> > dropped from gcc11).
> >
> > I integrated a toolchain/testsetup to be able to run the gcc testsuite
> > against a simulated avr target.
> >
> > I then used this toolchain to test 2 different existent
> > non-cc0-avr-backends (from pipcet and saaadhu, both github).
> >
> > The result is that saaadhu's backend seems to be working 100%. It has
> > identical testsuite results with the existing (but deprecated)
> cc0-backend,
> > which means that it can be used "as-is" for inclusion in gcc11.
> >
> > Please note that I did this work in context of a bounty @ bountysouce,
> more
> > information within the issue:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729#c35
> Hi,
>
> I tested the trees you have given with my own AVR test setup [1]. I
> confirm
> your results:
>   - saaadhu's tree does not introduce any regressions.
>   - pipcet's tree has 142 gcc and 299 g++ regressions (although many of
> them
>     are duplicates, e.g. same test case with different optimization
> levels).
>
> It's a bit awkward to copy gcc/config/avr into a mainline tree. Looking at
> their github history, both authors made some small changes in other areas.
> I
> would have prefered to cherry-pick or apply patches.
>
> =================================================
> baseline beb9afcaf1466996a301c778596c5df209e7913c
>
>                 === gcc Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes            87504
> # of unexpected failures        1105
> # of unexpected successes       15
> # of expected failures          581
> # of unresolved testcases       16786
> # of unsupported tests          5370
>
>                 === g++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes            140663
> # of unexpected failures        7932
> # of unexpected successes       21
> # of expected failures          620
> # of unresolved testcases       8603
> # of unsupported tests          11305
>

[...]

After "digesting" a bit more your review, I need to thank you for opening
my eyes re "cherrypick" suggestion and... the missing g++ summaries. I need
to update my setup to provide the g++ test-deltas, too. Note that in my
test-setup, more c++ tests pass than in yours, not exactly sure why. It's
in the "unresovled testcases".

=== g++ Summary ===

# of expected passes 146064
# of unexpected failures 8120
# of unexpected successes 21
# of expected failures 624
# of untested testcases 10
# of unresolved testcases 3306
# of unsupported tests 11200


> [1] https://github.com/dinuxbg/gnupru/blob/master/testing/buildbot-avr.sh


This contains very nice constructs!

Reply via email to