[LLVMdev] WinEH work to be done (in progress and otherwise)

[Chandler Carruth]

We already have a "unittests" tree in the test-suite.

If you want to create a new repository, you need to widely discuss it and
have a good plan for integrating it into build bots etc.

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:36 PM Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:

> I think we should make a new svn repository for these. test-suite is the
> logical place, but it's way too bloated and has too much Unix specific
> baggage. I'd really like to have something that just uses lit, can be
> checked out into projects, and can be run as part of check-all, like the
> compiler-rt execution test suite.
>
> My suggestion is to call it 'execution-tests', and we can arrange to
> auto-detect it if it gets checked out under llvm/projects/ and set up a
> test suite.
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Joseph Tremoulet <jotrem at microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Have any decisions been made on where to put executable WinEH tests?
>> Wherever they go, would it be helpful if I were to add some C++EH and/or
>> SEH tests pulled from MSVC's test suite, since compatibility is the goal
>> here?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> -Joseph
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] *On
>> Behalf Of *Reid Kleckner
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 19, 2015 5:56 PM
>> *To:* Kaylor, Andrew
>> *Cc:* llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
>> *Subject:* Re: [LLVMdev] WinEH work to be done (in progress and
>> otherwise)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Apart from this, the other WinEH-related task that I have on my radar
>> (but as of yet haven’t done anything about) is getting “nightly” tests
>> running on Windows.  I did look into the instructions for running the
>> “test-suite” tests, and it looks like that test suite is assuming a
>> Unix-type platform to some extent.  I tried to re-interpret the instruction
>> and run this suite on Windows, but it didn’t work and I haven’t looked into
>> trying to fix whatever the problems were.  I saw that someone submitted a
>> patch last November that claimed to improve the running of these tests on
>> Windows, but the patch was never reviewed or committed.
>>
>>
>>
>>  So I was wondering, is anyone running compile-and-execute type tests
>> with clang on a native (i.e. non-cygwin/mingw) Windows platform?  It seems
>> like this will be an important thing to do in general, but particularly so
>> for Windows EH, dependent as it is on interaction with the runtime
>> library.  That is, having tests which verify that we’re producing the xdata
>> entries we intend to produce doesn’t seem like a very thorough method of
>> testing and is no guarantee at all that we are producing working
>> executables.  In addition to the existing C++ EH tests in the “test-suite”
>> tests, I have a suite of tests (not currently in any public repository)
>> that were specifically developed to exercise Windows-specific problem
>> cases.  I’d eventually like to see these tests run on some regular basis
>> against clang on Windows.  Is there any work currently under way to make
>> something like this happen?
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd like to have a place where we can put small, general purpose
>> execution tests for clang, but we don't have a good place. test-suite is
>> just too big and non-portable. The results it generates are also not
>> suitable for consumption by developers. If someone upstream breaks a C++ EH
>> execution test, what should they do, how should they debug? A portable
>> assembly-emission test works because they can see the before and after and
>> evaluate whether their change was correct or not.
>>
>>
>>
>> For the rest of the MS C++ ABI, we've gotten by self-hosting Clang and
>> then building Chromium, and that's enough coverage. Neither project uses
>> C++ exceptions, so that's not going to cut it for this. Long ago Timur used
>> to maintain a small repo in Google Code for this:
>>
>> https://code.google.com/p/smoke-cpp-tests/
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__code.google.com_p_smoke-2Dcpp-2Dtests_&d=AwMFaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=Mfk2qtn1LTDThVkh6-oGglNfMADXfJdty4_bhmuhMHA&m=nSJRS9-5NwSLdiLng62PIvrk3rcZRDmpF2oboUMhpgE&s=4QsKoKOgmJ6EUy3biMinr91bQc7pSbgjbvRibkg6lIA&e=>
>>
>> Nobody runs it though and we haven't updated as we encountered and solved
>> problems.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the best we can do is add a subdirectory of test-suite that's
>> outside it's makefile system and go from there. Or we could add a new repo
>> similar to the ABI test suite that Sony contributed. However, you may see
>> that as a cautionary tale. Sony added the test suite, and nobody else runs
>> it and the bot has been broken for a month.
>>
>>
>>
>> I guess my conclusion is that this will probably be a lot of work, and I
>> think it'll provide less value than you expect from it. But, if you think
>> it's worth it and want to push it through, then it costs LLVM very little
>> check a few test cases in outside the main clang/llvm repos.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150528/2df3f699/attachment.html>