[llvm] r289648 - [AVR] Add the very first on-target test

[Dylan McKay via llvm-commits]

> This test will fail as soon as anyone builds the AVR back-end without
access to AVR hardware.

I added a config file that ignored the tests if AVR was not built? On top
of that, the tests were only supposed to run if 'AVRLIT_BOARD' and
'AVRLIT_PORT' is set. Clearly it didn't work properly (due to my
inexperience with Python)

If I were to fix that, it wouldn't stop the tests from breaking if AVR was
made non-experimental?

> do not add *any* execution tests to the LLVM tree

Do we have anything formal thing about this? I'd like to have a
conversation about it. I agree it isn't something we really do currently,
but I believe there is real value in adding these tests in tree.

> Reverted in r289651

Thanks for that!



On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 2:35 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
wrote:

> On 14 December 2016 at 13:32, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi Dylan,
> >
> > This test will fail as soon as anyone builds the AVR back-end without
> > access to AVR hardware.
> >
> > It's also guaranteed to fail whenever the AVR back-end moves out of
> > experimental (when everyone will build it by default).
> >
> > Please, revert this patch and do not add *any* execution tests to the
> LLVM tree.
>
> Oh well, it seems I was being optimistic. It breaks now because no one
> else has the AVRLIT_PORT.
>
> http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-cmake-aarch64-
> 42vma/builds/2086/steps/ninja%20check%201/logs/stdio
>
> Reverted in r289651.
>
> cheers,
> --renato
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20161215/371c0e13/attachment.html>