RE: GDB/Fortran: Support for Assumed Rank Zero.

["Potharla, Rupesh via Gdb-patches" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>]

[AMD Official Use Only]



>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andrew Burgess <aburgess@redhat.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 9:00 PM
>To: Potharla, Rupesh <Rupesh.Potharla@amd.com>; Kevin Buettner
><kevinb@redhat.com>; Kevin Buettner via Gdb-patches <gdb-
>patches@sourceware.org>
>Cc: George, Jini Susan <JiniSusan.George@amd.com>; Parasuraman,
>Hariharan <Hariharan.Parasuraman@amd.com>; Sharma, Alok Kumar
><AlokKumar.Sharma@amd.com>
>Subject: RE: GDB/Fortran: Support for Assumed Rank Zero.
>
>[CAUTION: External Email]
>
>"Potharla, Rupesh via Gdb-patches" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
>
>> [AMD Official Use Only]
>>
>>
>>>On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 08:33:28 -0700
>>>Kevin Buettner via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm also (still) wondering how to run the testsuite to use flang
>>>> instead of gfortran since it'd be nice to test to see if the
>>>> setup_xfail actually works.  I spent just enough time looking at it
>>>> last week to convince myself that GDB's testing infrastructure
>>>> currently lacks the mechanisms to do this.  However, I could be
>>>> wrong, so if someone knows how it's done, I'd like to learn about it...
>>>
>>>It seems that the answer is to run the test as follows:
>>>
>>>make check TESTS="gdb.fortran/assumedrank.exp"
>>>RUNTESTFLAGS="F90_FOR_TARGET=flang"
>>>
>>>(I thought that I had tried this last week.)
>>>
>>>When I run the above command on my Fedora 35 machine, I see:
>>>
>>># of expected passes            500
>>># of unexpected failures        2503
>>># of unresolved testcases       500
>>>
>> But the command should only run assumedrank.exp testcase, looks like it
>ran all the tests under gdb.fortran.
>>
>> gdb summary after running assumedrank.exp with flang:
>>
>>                 === gdb Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes            25
>> # of expected failures          1
>>
>>>So it seems that this test doesn't work very well with flang at the moment.
>>>
>>>That being the case, while I'm not against adding setup_xfail for
>>>clang, it doesn't seem all that useful due to the dismal results when
>>>testing against flang.
>>>
>>
>>
>>         if {$test_count == 1 && [test_compiler_info {clang-*}]} {
>>            setup_xfail "*-*-*"
>>            fail "compiler does not support rank 0"
>>            continue
>>         }
>
>It is possible to call 'xfail' directly, so you could just do:
>
>  xfail "compiler does not support rank 0"
>
>But I don't think that's correct really, xfail should be used when a specific test
>is actually being run, so we'd expect to do something
>like:
>
>  xfail $test_name
>
>See gdb.ada/call_pn.exp for examples.
>
>I wonder if really 'unsupported' would be a better choice here - the
>description in the Dejagnu manual says:
>
>  UNSUPPORTED
>       There is no support for the tested case.  This may mean that a
>       conditional feature of an operating system, or of a compiler, is
>       not implemented....
>
>Which seems to describe this case perfectly, so:
>
>    if {$test_count == 1 && [test_compiler_info {clang-*}]} {
>      unsupported "compiler does not support rank 0"
>      continue
>    }
>
>Thoughts?

I started with xfail then realized xfail is not used in fortran testcases. Unsupported looks like the best option for this case, changing it to unsupported.    

>Thanks,
>Andrew
>
>
>>
>> I think failing the testcase at the iteration entry and continuing to test next
>case is the best way to handle these dismal results.
>> Please let me know your suggestions/comments on this.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Rupesh P