[LLVMdev] Need advise on adding tests - Was: Re: ARM MC .s status?

[Jason Kim]

Is the rationale that llvm has matured/advanced to the point where
integration tests are the only ones to make sense from a test density
perspective?

On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Jason Kim <jasonwkim at google.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am trying to get up to speed on the MC object file emission for ARM,
> the first cut being for ELF, and the testing required for that.
>
> Obviously, we want the tests for the .o emission to ultimately test
> the entire .ll -> many llvm passes -> .bc -> .o, but as a first cut,
> my instinct tells me that a simple .cpp unit tests that directly
> invokes the MC code to generate (and self-check) the ARM ELF might be
> the way to go, but I am wondering where the best place for something
> like this is? I.e. From what I can tell, in the test-suite, even
> single file .c files are (according to the readme at least) are run as
> integration tests that compare llvm .bc / lli output to th eoutput of
> a native compile ...
>
> The testing document in llvm.org only talk about pretty heavy weight
> integration tests (Tcl + FileCheck, .cpp -> (many compilers  ...)
> which is fine, but, but as a sanity check, I can't seem to find an
> example of a test.cpp file that invokes a certain subset of LLVM API,
> and self-checks the result - Or is the heavyweight "compile a .cpp
> file and cross check LLVM-clang's output to gcc" the only way
> something like this supported?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Jason.
> -jason
>