Hi

On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 07:47:49PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 07:39:18PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > as Jakub requested, this patch deals with HSA "excess errors" in the
> > libgomp library testsuite by passing -Wno-hsa to all of them.  IIUC,
> > that passing it in the second parameter of dg-runtest (as opposed to
> > the third) means that it will apply even tests that have their own
> > dg-options, which is presumably easier for everyone, provided that hsa
> > will get is own libgomp testsuite directories.
> 
> What is the difference betwee the $flags and $default-extra-cflags
> arguments to dg-runtest?

well, exactly what I wrote in the original email and what you have
quoted (and me as well) above.  But let me quote the dejagnu source
comment of dg-runtest, which is perhaps more clear:

  # FLAGS is a set of options to always pass.
  # DEFAULT_EXTRA_FLAGS is a set of options to pass if the testcase
  # doesn't
  # specify any (with dg-option).

So if I changed DEFAULT_EXTRA_FLAGS rather than FLAGS, I'd have to go
through all testcases specifying dg-options and add -Wno-hsa there
too.  Moreover, we'd have to add -Wno-hsa to all appropriate future
testcases if they specify their own dg-options.

Perhaps we should be using dg-additional-options in libgomp testsuite
wherever possible but there certainly are testcases using dg-options.

> You seem to stick -Wno-hsa into the former,
> which to me looks like it will be mentioned as part of the test
> names (e.g. when cycling through -O* options, -Wno-hsa would be printed
> along with -O2 etc.)?

Yes, that is an unfortunate side-effect. Furthermore, automated
comparison scripts might be confused by the change (mine was,
reporting all testcases as newly passed/xfailed and old as
disappeared).

But again, I do not have a strong preference, I can change the patches
to use DEFAULT_EXTRA_FLAGS and am willing to be watching for fallout
and fixing dg-options if you prefer that.  So let me know what you
consider nicer and I'll do it.

Thanks,

Martin

Reply via email to