Hi Sam,
> When a test fails with 'excess errors', there's often only one actual
> error (an excess "(error|warning|note):") and it'd be nice to not have
> to dig in the .log files to fish that out.
I think such a move would be a bad mistake. Consider ICEs where you
have something like
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr35318.c -O0 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/vol/gcc/src/hg/master/local/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr35318.c:9:1:
error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn 13 25 26 2 (parallel [
(set (reg:DF 10 %o2 [orig:112 x ] [112])
(asm_operands/v:DF ("") ("=r,r") 0 [
(reg:SI 11 %o3 [orig:112 x+4 ] [112])
(mem/c:DF (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 30 %fp)
(const_int -24 [0xffffffffffffffe8])) [3
%sfp+-24 S8 A64])
[and many more lines...]
This would clutter the output beyond recognition, especially if this is
a torture test which is run at several optimization options.
Excess errors, like all others, always require further investigation.
In my experience, digging the full error messages from the .log files is
usually the smallest part of that. You often even have to rerun the
compilation manually to also get the parts that are filtered out by the
prune procs.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
