[LLVMdev] RFC: Dropping DejaGNU

[Chris Lattner]

On Oct 18, 2009, at 7:49 PM, Daniel Dunbar wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As you may or may not have noticed, I have gradually been replacing
> the testing infrastructure in LLVM. Most of this work is moving LLVM
> and Clang to share a single testing tool, 'lit'. See:
>  http://llvm.org/cmds/lit.html
> for documentation on the tool itself.
>
> If you haven't already tried it, please consider switch to 'make
> check-lit' as an alternative to 'make check'. If it doesn't work for
> you, or you find it doesn't do something DejaGNU did and you like,
> please let me know. My eventual plan is to move to lit entirely and
> drop DejaGNU support, so consider yourself warned.

This is great work Daniel,

One question: Why not switch 'make check' to default to lit and offer  
'make check-dejagnu' as a workaround.  That forces adoption :)

-Chris

>
> A couple key points about 'make check-lit':
> 1. It runs the unittests as well, there is no separate 'make
> unittests' step. If you like, there is also a 'make check-all' which
> will also run the Clang tests at the same time if it happens to be
> checked out in the standard location (tools/clang).
> 2. The public buildbots have switched to it. It shouldn't happen, but
> if you do find a discrepancy between DejaGNU and lit, let me know.
>
> If you aren't already familiar with it, here are some of the  
> advantages of lit:
> 1. It is portable. It already is being used on the Windows buildbot
> for Clang, and almost all of our tests "just work".
> 2. It uses multiple threads to test. While it doesn't yet scale quite
> as well as I would like, switching the Linux x86_64 buildbot to it
> dropped its cycle time by over 30% (just because running the tests got
> about 3x faster).
> 3. I've tried hard to make it easy to use, and will keep working in
> this direction. Eventually I want to replace the TestRunner scripts as
> well so that all that is needed to run a single test is 'lit
> path/to/the/test'. I also would like to improve the output for
> failures to be more informative (particularly when run via buildbot).
>
> See http://llvm.org/PR5217 for my TODO list before dropping DejaGNU,
> feel free to add comments, requests, or blocking bugs to that one.
>
> - Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev