<div dir="ltr"><div>Maybe. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "functions with no asm".</div><div><br></div><div>X86 especially has a lot of tests with a half dozen or more RUN lines. There is a common prefix for all RUN lines or at least all AVX/AVX512 run lines and then successively more precise check prefixes grouping smaller and smaller subsets of RUN lines. The goal is to minimize the number of check lines in the file by grouping as much as possible. But allowing precise checks for individual functions that have different behavior on many targets.</div><div><br></div><div>Since we can't have unused prefixes in the test files any more we might lose some of the finer grained check prefixes if multiple RUN lines produce the same results for all functions today. A future change may break that and require finer grained prefixes to be added. That's the important case to warn about since it requires the user to change the RUN lines.</div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">~Craig</div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 9:39 PM Mircea Trofin <<a href="mailto:mtrofin@google.com">mtrofin@google.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>I see, so maybe there are some levels of warning to observe - "everything", functions with no asm, prefixes with no use. And maybe the default is the second?<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Feb 2, 2021, 21:35 Craig Topper <<a href="mailto:craig.topper@gmail.com" target="_blank">craig.topper@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi Mircea,<div><br></div><div>It looks like the script is now reporting warnings even when there is a set of prefixes to update the test for all functions. For example, if you add -check-prefixes=CHECK,RV32I to the first command in alu32.ll and -check-prefixes=CHECK,RV64I to the second you'll get this, but it looks like there's a valid solution for the test and no user intervention is required.</div><div><span style="color:rgb(158,76,4);font-family:Menlo;font-size:11px;font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures"><br></span></div><div><span style="color:rgb(158,76,4);font-family:Menlo;font-size:11px;font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function slti had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function sltiu had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function srli had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function srai had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function add had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function sub had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function sll had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function slt had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function sltu had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function srl had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p>
<p style="margin:0px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-stretch:normal;line-height:normal;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="font-variant-ligatures:no-common-ligatures">WARNING: Function sra had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK</span></p></span></div>
<div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr">~Craig</div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 3:19 PM Craig Topper <<a href="mailto:craig.topper@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">craig.topper@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Yes, that matches my expectations. Thanks!<div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr">~Craig</div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 3:05 PM Mircea Trofin <<a href="mailto:mtrofin@google.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">mtrofin@google.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Indeed, we're now not output-ing the case where some functions have conflicting asm, just the case when all functions lose their asm. </div><div><br></div>I have a fix ready; to confirm, for this example (i.e. taking all (both) the "--check-prefix"-es in alu32.ll), would this output match your expectations?<div><br></div><div>WARNING: Function slti had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function sltiu had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function srli had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function srai had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function add had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function sub had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function sll had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function slt had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function sltu had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function srl had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br>WARNING: Function sra had conflicting output from different RUN lines for prefix CHECK<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:12 PM Mircea Trofin <<a href="mailto:mtrofin@google.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">mtrofin@google.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">looking</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:11 PM Craig Topper <<a href="mailto:craig.topper@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">craig.topper@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>update_llc_test_checks.py seems to not be telling me about assembly that differs under the same prefix anymore.</div><div><br></div><div>An easy way to see this is to just remove the --check-prefix from test/CodeGen/RISCV/alu32.ll and run the script. You'll get no error about conflicts. And if you look at the resulting file only some functions will have been updated to use CHECK as the prefix.</div><div><br></div><div>Reverting some commits to update_llc_test_checks.py suggest this may have been broken by e2dc306b1ac71258e6ce40a66e778527f282c355 [utils] Fix UpdateTestChecks case where 2 runs differ for last label</div>
<br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr">~Craig</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>