smeenai added a comment. Is it worth adding a test that a function with an explicit xray-instrument attribute also has these other attributes applied?
================ Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/xray-attributes-skip-entry-exit.cpp:8 +// RUN: -std=c++11 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm -o - %s \ +// RUN: | FileCheck --check-prefixes CHECK,NOCUSTOM,NOTYPED,SKIPENTRY %s +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fxray-instrument \ ---------------- I don't see the NOCUSTOM or NOTYPED prefixes defined? ================ Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/xray-attributes-skip-entry-exit.cpp:12 +// RUN: -std=c++11 -triple x86_64-unknown-unknown -emit-llvm -o - %s \ +// RUN: | FileCheck --check-prefixes CHECK,FUNCTION,NOCUSTOM,NOTYPED %s + ---------------- Same with the FUNCTION prefix. ================ Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/xray-ignore-loops.cpp:2 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fxray-instrument -fxray-ignore-loops -x c++ -std=c++11 -emit-llvm -o - %s -triple x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu | FileCheck %s +// RUN: %clang -fxray-instrument -fxray-ignore-loops -x c++ -std=c++11 -S -emit-llvm -o - %s -target x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu | FileCheck %s ---------------- From what I've seen, CodeGen tests don't usually invoke the driver directly. They have a test that the driver passes the correct flags to cc1 (as you do below), and then they just test that cc1 does the right thing with that flag. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D73842/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D73842 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
