On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 12:46 PM David Greene <d...@cray.com> wrote: > David Blaikie via Openmp-dev <openmp-...@lists.llvm.org> writes: > > > I have a bit of concern about this sort of thing - worrying it'll lead to > > people being less cautious about writing the more isolated tests. > > That's a fair concern. Reviewers will still need to insist on small > component-level tests to go along with patches. We don't have to > sacrifice one to get the other. > > > Dunno if they need a new place or should just be more stuff in > test-suite, > > though. > > There are at least two problems I see with using test-suite for this: > > - It is a separate repository and thus is not as convenient as tests > that live with the code. One cannot commit an end-to-end test > atomically with the change meant to be tested. > > - It is full of large codes which is not the kind of testing I'm talking > about. >
Oh, right - I'd forgotten that the test-suite wasn't part of the monorepo (due to size, I can understand why) - fair enough. Makes sense to me to have lit-style lightweight, targeted, but intentionally end-to-end tests. > > Let me describe how I recently added some testing in our downstream > fork. > > - I implemented a new feature along with a C source test. > > - I used clang to generate asm from that test and captured the small > piece of it I wanted to check in an end-to-end test. > > - I used clang to generate IR just before the feature kicked in and > created an opt-style test for it. Generating this IR is not always > straightfoward and it would be great to have better tools to do this, > but that's another discussion. > > - I took the IR out of opt (after running my feature) and created an > llc-style test out of it to check the generated asm. The checks are > the same as in the original C end-to-end test. > > So the tests are checking at each stage that the expected input is > generating the expected output and the end-to-end test checks that we go > from source to asm correctly. > > These are all really small tests, easily runnable as part of the normal > "make check" process. > > -David >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev