"Maciej W. Rozycki" <ma...@embecosm.com> writes: > On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > >> > The test execution timeout is different from the tool execution timeout >> > where it is GCC execution that is being guarded against taking excessive >> > amount of time on the test host rather than the resulting test case >> > executable run on the target afterwards, as concerned here. GCC already >> > has a `dg-timeout-factor' setting for the tool execution timeout, but has >> > no means to increase the test execution timeout. The GCC side of these >> > changes adds a corresponding `dg-test-timeout-factor' setting. >> >> Hmm. I think it would be more correct to emphasize that the >> existing dg-timeout-factor affects both the tool execution *and* >> the test execution, whereas your new dg-test-timeout-factor only >> affects the test execution. (And still measured on the host.) > > Not really, `dg-timeout-factor' is only applied to tool execution and it > doesn't affect test execution. Timeout value reporting used to be limited > in DejaGNU, but you can enable it easily now by adding the DejaGNU patch > series referred in the cover letter and see that `dg-timeout-factor' is > ignored for test execution. > >> Usually the compilation time is close to 0, so is this based on >> an actual need more than an itchy "wart"? >> >> Or did I miss something? > > Compilation is usually quite fast, but this is not always the case. If > you look at the tests that do use `dg-timeout-factor' in GCC, and some > commits that added the setting, then you ought to find actual use cases. > I saw at least one such a test that takes an awful lot of time here on a > reasonably fast host machine and still passes where GCC has been built > with optimisation enabled, but does time out in the compilation phase if > the compiler has been built at -O0 for debugging purposes. I'd have to > chase it though if you couldn't find it as I haven't written the name > down.
Sounds like it could be the infamous gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c :) Richard > So yes, `dg-timeout-factor' does have its use, but it is different from > that of `dg-test-timeout-factor', hence the need for a separate setting. > > Maciej