On 8/28/25 13:27, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Thu, 28 Aug 2025, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
I find the classification this would provide useful, like I like the
(internal compiler error) classification we already have. I would
of course not duplicate all of th eabove message but only
'(unrecognizable insn)' in the above case.
It's not the only consideration, but keep in mind that such output is not
stable and will cause some headaches with scripting that compares two summary
files.
Classifications really don't belong in the test name (the thing after
"PASS: " or "FAIL: ", until end of line) at all, they belong as separate
metadata so the set of test names can be stable when the testsuite itself
doesn't change. Unfortunately DejaGnu output doesn't have any clean way
to provide such metadata for a test result that can be reliably associated
with it but is clearly separate from the test name.
In theory, you should be able to get that information from the test log
above the result line but after the previous result (or group of
results). If not, that is a bug in the testsuite and/or a deficiency in
the program under test.
If you want to annotate a FAIL from a test that triggered an internal
compiler error, you should probably emit that using verbose just before
reporting the failure. (Use {verbose $message 0} to emit $message
unconditionally.)
Such a message will not appear in the summary at all, thus avoiding
confusing tools that compare summaries.
-- Jacob
