r207951 - Update lit.cfg to support the clang-interpreter test from r207950

[Richard Smith]

On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com> wrote:

>
> On 01/06/2014 04:05, Richard Smith wrote:
>
>  On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com <mailto:
>> alp at nuanti.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Author: alp
>>     Date: Mon May  5 01:42:07 2014
>>     New Revision: 207951
>>
>>     URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=207951&view=rev
>>     Log:
>>     Update lit.cfg to support the clang-interpreter test from r207950
>>
>>     Performs behind-the-scenes RUN line substitution similarly to
>>     what's done with
>>     clang-check and clang-format to ensure the executable is found.
>>
>>     Modified:
>>         cfe/trunk/test/CMakeLists.txt
>>         cfe/trunk/test/lit.cfg
>>
>>     Modified: cfe/trunk/test/CMakeLists.txt
>>     URL:
>>     http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/
>> CMakeLists.txt?rev=207951&r1=207950&r2=207951&view=diff
>>     ============================================================
>> ==================
>>     --- cfe/trunk/test/CMakeLists.txt (original)
>>     +++ cfe/trunk/test/CMakeLists.txt Mon May  5 01:42:07 2014
>>     @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ list(APPEND CLANG_TEST_DEPS
>>        c-index-test diagtool arcmt-test c-arcmt-test
>>        clang-check clang-format
>>        clang-tblgen
>>     +  clang-interpreter
>>
>>
>> I'm all in favor of having buildbots check that the clang-interpreter
>> example still works, but is it really sufficiently valuable to slow down
>> *all* clang-test builds by adding another (slow) link action? Can we make
>> this only run on the buildbots by default somehow?
>>
>
> They aren't run by default. Perhaps you're passing
> -DCLANG_BUILD_EXAMPLES=1 which causes the examples to get built and
> included in the test set?
>

Nope.

$ grep CLANG_BUILD_EXAMPLES build/CMakeCache.txt
CLANG_BUILD_EXAMPLES:BOOL=OFF

Note that your change above adds clang-interpreter unconditionally to
CLANG_TEST_DEPS.

I don't think it makes sense to have an additional mode that enables the
> examples but excludes their tests.
>
> I've just timed the test deps build with and without all examples on an
> old laptop and the difference isn't measurable above noise:
>
> With examples and example tests enabled:
>
> touch ../upstream/clang/lib/Basic/Diagnostic.cpp && time ninja
> check-clang-deps
> real    0m1.181s
> user    0m2.648s
> sys    0m1.061s
>
> Without examples or example tests enabled:
>
> touch ../upstream/clang/lib/Basic/Diagnostic.cpp && time ninja
> check-clang-deps
> real    0m1.283s
> user    0m2.637s
> sys    0m1.065s
>
> Beyond that, the complete run time for all the example tests combined
> looks like it weighs in at ~1/20th of a second in a full test run.
>

The problem is the link time, not the runtime of the tests.

Surely all of this is insignificant when there are tests that generate
> large files or sleep for seconds? Also consider using lit directly with the
> --incremental flag.
>
> Alp.
>
>
>
>         PrintFunctionNames
>>        SampleAnalyzerPlugin
>>        )
>>
>>     Modified: cfe/trunk/test/lit.cfg
>>     URL:
>>     http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/lit.
>> cfg?rev=207951&r1=207950&r2=207951&view=diff
>>     ============================================================
>> ==================
>>     --- cfe/trunk/test/lit.cfg (original)
>>     +++ cfe/trunk/test/lit.cfg Mon May  5 01:42:07 2014
>>     @@ -308,6 +308,7 @@ for pattern in [r"\bFileCheck\b",
>>                      r"\bc-index-test\b",
>>                      NoPreHyphenDot + r"\bclang-check\b" +
>>     NoPostHyphenDot,
>>                      NoPreHyphenDot + r"\bclang-format\b" +
>>     NoPostHyphenDot,
>>     +                NoPreHyphenDot + r"\bclang-interpreter\b" +
>>     NoPostHyphenDot,
>>                      # FIXME: Some clang test uses opt?
>>                      NoPreHyphenDot + r"\bopt\b" + NoPostHyphenDot,
>>                      # Handle these specially as they are strings searched
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     cfe-commits mailing list
>>     cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
>>     http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>
>>
>>
> --
> http://www.nuanti.com
> the browser experts
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140531/7755275f/attachment.html>