[compiler-rt] r238874 - Tests: disable test of /proc filesystem on Darwin.

[Evgeniy Stepanov]

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
<dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-Jun-05, at 11:32, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith
>> <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-Jun-05, at 11:11, Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni.stepanov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It looks like FreeBSD may have /proc, so moving the test to Linux
>>>> would be bad.
>>>
>>> Although it might be disappearing there, based on this ancient
>>> reference Wikipedia has on its procfs page:
>>>
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2011-February/010760.html
>>>
>>>> You could add XFAIL: darwin, or, in this particular
>>>> case, simply exit(0) if the file in /proc could not be opened.
>>>
>>> Anyone know lit well enough to add a `procfs` feature?  Seems like
>>>
>>>    REQUIRES: procfs
>>>
>>> would be the clearest answer.
>>>
>>> I don't like `XFAIL`, since this isn't really a test failure that
>>> we're going to try to fix eventually -- it's a feature that Darwin
>>> doesn't have and isn't planning to grow.
>>
>> Yes, unfortunately lit does not support excluding a single test based
>> on certain conditions (smth like REQUIRES: NOT darwin, or UNSUPPORTED:
>> darwin would be useful, maybe even allowing complex boolean
>> expressions). Also, in this case "procfs" feature would not be enough
>> because the condition should look like procfs && !android. The test is
>> broken on Android for other reasons.
>
> Is it broken on Android, as in it should succeed some day?  Then
> you just need:
>
>     REQUIRES: procfs
>     XFAIL: android

It's unimplemented. Maybe one day it will be.

>
> Although from Ed's later response in the thread, it sounds like
> BSD's procfs is optional and only weakly related to Linux's, so
> I still don't see the problem with moving this to the Linux/
> directory (or a new LinuxLike/ directory with `XFAIL: android`).
> Posix/ certainly seems wrong, since procfs is apparently
> unrelated to POSIX, and doesn't seem to have any sort of
> standard behaviour or availability.

I don't mind moving it to Linux.

>
> Note: from my reading of utils/lit/lit/TestRunner.py, it looks
> like `UNSUPPORTED: procfs` is the equivalent of
> `REQUIRES: !procfs`, assuming `procfs` is some feature, and all
> of these directives spell `&&` as `,`.
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Tim Northover <tnorthover at apple.com> wrote:
>>>>>> IMO this test should be moved to Linux/ (and duplicated to an Android/
>>>>>> directory?),
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought that originally, but Wiki says /proc filesystems are on at least some BSDs too (though I'm not sure if they support the particular access being done here).
>>>>>
>>>>>> or moved to a LinuxLike/ directory, or the individual test
>>>>>> file disabled on Darwin.
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't know you could disable individual files, that sounds like a reasonable change if it is possible though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim.
>>>
>