Differential D121996

[NVPTX][tests] Do not run tests that require direct object generation
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by ikudrin on Mar 18 2022, 4:48 AM.

Details

Reviewers

nigelp-xmos
JDevlieghere
MaskRay
echristo

Commits

rGc344d97a125b: [NVPTX][tests] Do not run tests that require direct object generation

Summary

NVPTX does not support generating binary files, which is required for these tests.

The majority of tests in 'DebugInfo/Generic' also require emitting object files, so they all are disabled for NVPTX.

Diff Detail

Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

Event Timeline

ikudrin created this revision.Mar 18 2022, 4:48 AM

Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald TranscriptMar 18 2022, 4:48 AM

Herald added subscribers: asavonic, emaste. · View Herald Transcript

ikudrin requested review of this revision.Mar 18 2022, 4:48 AM

ikudrin added a parent revision: D121994: [tests] Make 'object-emission' imply 'default_triple'.

ikudrin added a subscriber: jholewinski.

ikudrin retitled this revision from [nvptx][tests] Do not run tests that require direct object generation to [NVPTX][tests] Do not run tests that require direct object generation.Mar 18 2022, 4:52 AM

Harbormaster completed remote builds in B155020: Diff 416461.Mar 18 2022, 5:13 AM

The code LGTM. When object-emission was reintroduced in D98508, there was some discussion on whether XCore ought to use this feature, or provide an integrated assembler instead. Sorry I don't know NVPTX: is NVPTX different because it generates assembly as its natural output, and binary does not make sense? Or could it have an integrated assembler at some point?

In D121996#3392197, @nigelp-xmos wrote:

The code LGTM. When object-emission was reintroduced in D98508, there was some discussion on whether XCore ought to use this feature, or provide an integrated assembler instead. Sorry I don't know NVPTX: is NVPTX different because it generates assembly as its natural output, and binary does not make sense? Or could it have an integrated assembler at some point?

As far as I know, there are no plans for adding the integrated assembler.

LGTM but I would prefer to hear from other reviewers who commented on object-emission before.

In D121996#3392197, @nigelp-xmos wrote:

The code LGTM. When object-emission was reintroduced in D98508, there was some discussion on whether XCore ought to use this feature, or provide an integrated assembler instead. Sorry I don't know NVPTX: is NVPTX different because it generates assembly as its natural output, and binary does not make sense? Or could it have an integrated assembler at some point?

NVPTX only generates assembly. It is not going to have native code generation any time soon. It it did, we'd have multiple native back-ends. In other words, LGTM as far as NVPTX back-end is concerned.

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state Needs Review.Mar 22 2022, 5:50 AM

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds.

Closed by commit rGc344d97a125b: [NVPTX][tests] Do not run tests that require direct object generation (authored by ikudrin). · Explain Why

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

ikudrin added a commit: rGc344d97a125b: [NVPTX][tests] Do not run tests that require direct object generation.

Herald added a subscriber: StephenFan. · View Herald TranscriptMar 22 2022, 5:50 AM

LGTM

ikudrin mentioned this in D136612: [lit][REQUIRES] Fix some tests with incorrect REQUIRES clauses.Nov 5 2022, 1:55 AM