Ok. I'll roll this chnage back and let's see how a line in the test would fly.
I'm going to add ability to declare a target dependency like this: ; REQUIRES x86-registered-target Any registered target name could be used there, like arm-registered-target, and so on. How does this sound? Thanks Galina On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Galina Kistanova <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> For some reason I havn't received notifications from the cfe-commits >> list and almost missed this discussion. Sorry. >> >> > > What's the intended use of this? What problem are you solving? >> >> As Eli has pointed, some tests depend on a particular target to be >> supported by the backend, which is not always the case. Such tests >> should be effectively excluded (one way or another). We should not >> force people to support all possible backends just to get tests pass. >> >> > Any reason something like XTARGET won't work here? >> >> XTARGET won't work nicely here because it marks a test as pass for >> listed platforms. In this particular case, all targets except X86 >> should be listed (effectively * will be used) in the XTARGET >> statement. I don't think this is a good idea. Having these tests >> "pass" is not a good idea either, they must be "unsupported" which >> they actually are. >> >> If some test is platform-specific for a reason, it should be taged as >> such. >> I have been thinking of extending REQUIRES statement for this purpose >> or adding a new DEPENDS one, but it is not there yet. >> >> My current goal was to separate the existing platform-specific tests >> from generic, and start this discussion. The suggested approach is not >> very elegant, but we have the same tests directory structure in llvm, >> and it seems doing its job. > > The reason why I would rather a line in the test itself instead of a > directory here is that I don't expect Clang tests to frequently require a > particular backend in LLVM. As they should be exceptions, I'm inclined to > pick the solution which has the lowest impact on the over-all test suite. > The LLVM test suite has a different set of priorities. There, testing a > particular backend is common and encouraged. There are enough tests for > enough different architectures to make having separate directories useful > for organization. Those are likely reason enough to have separate > directories. I've not yet seen a parallel reason in Clang. > _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
