On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 at 23:43, Jakub Jelinek <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 10:52:13PM +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > Shouldn't that be excluded in case RUNTESTFLAGS variable contains any word > > > ending with .exp ? > > > I mean for quick testing of a single testcase with > > > make check RUNTESTFLAGS=conformance.exp=something/that.cc > > > every additional overhead counts (and there is already some). > > > Unless check-abi quickly skips it in that case already. > > > > check-abi is simply: > > > > check-abi: site.exp baseline_symbols > > -@runtest $(AM_RUNTESTFLAGS) --tool libstdc++ $(RUNTESTFLAGS) abi.exp > > > > So yes, with e.g. RUNTESTFLAGS=conformance.exp it means that the "just > > run abi.exp" step will actually run both abi.exp and conformance.exp, > > which would run the whole testsuite twice. > > > > So we could do this instead: > > > > check-am: > > GLIBCXX_TESTSUITE_STDS=modules runtest --tool libstdc++ abi.exp > > $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) check-DEJAGNU > > > > This would run *only* abi.exp and wouldn't use RUNTESTFLAGS. > > But that will still do abi.exp testing even when somebody wants to test > a single test in conformance.exp. > I meant something like > check-am: > ifeq (,$(filter %.exp,$(subst =, ,$(RUNTESTFLAGS)))) > GLIBCXX_TESTSUITE_STDS=modules $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) check-abi > endif > $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) check-DEJAGNU > So, if you are testing with make check or > make check RUNTESTFLAGS='--target_board=unix\{-m32,-m64\}' > or something similar, it will test the check-abi with modules too, > but if you are after a specific *.exp file or set of them, it won't.
Yeah, that's better - thanks.
