[libFuzzer] [NFC] Generalize DSO tests to work even when files are moved.

[vitalybuka]

Reverted in r333257

[george.karpenkov]

Reverted in r333257

I'm glad the bot went back to green, but I'm super confused: how can one .test file affect another? If it does, there's another problem here.

[vitalybuka]

Only these were red.

http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-fuzzer/builds/15597/steps/check-fuzzer/logs/stdio

********************
Testing: 0 .. 10.. 20.. 30.. 40.. 50.. 60.. 70.. 80.. 90.. 
Testing Time: 25.10s
********************
Failing Tests (2):
    LLVMFuzzer :: dso.test
    LLVMFuzzer :: dump_coverage.test

[vitalybuka]

Let me know if you need help with debugging. I can reproduce it locally.

[george.karpenkov]

@vitalybuka thanks, I can now reproduce on my Linux machine as well. Looking into this.

[george.karpenkov]

@vitalybuka Turns out the simple trick I was using for Darwin did not work for the Linux linker, and more invasive changes were required.
What do you think? I don't see a way to do this without introducing extra substitutions, even though they are ugly.
I don't really mind the ugliness in testing configuration scripts here.

[vitalybuka]

In D47292#1130377, @george.karpenkov wrote:

@vitalybuka Turns out the simple trick I was using for Darwin did not work for the Linux linker, and more invasive changes were required.
What do you think? I don't see a way to do this without introducing extra substitutions, even though they are ugly.
I don't really mind the ugliness in testing configuration scripts here.

From patch title I don't understand what are you trying to solve.
Why do we need to move files?

[george.karpenkov]

Why do we need to move files?

For testing on devices.

If you look at other tests in compiler-rt, they all use a similar combination of expansions to get dynamic libraries on devices working.
Here the problem was that since there were TWO dynamic libraries, the usual flags did not work.
(On Linux, linking in libblah.so requires a flag -lblah, so appending a postfix after both libblah.so and after libblah does not work, since liblah.so1 != libblah1.so)

[george.karpenkov]

@vitalybuka What do you think? I guess a more generalized framework could be developed to reduce code duplication, but I'm really not sure whether it's worth it.

[vitalybuka]

In D47292#1131936, @george.karpenkov wrote:

@vitalybuka What do you think? I guess a more generalized framework could be developed to reduce code duplication, but I'm really not sure whether it's worth it.

I see.
Maybe we can create a patch with replacements like "%xdynamiclib_filename" -> "%xdynamiclib_filename1"
Then we will just wrap lit.common.cfg changes into the loop (1...2 for now :-) )?

[george.karpenkov]

@vitalybuka OK

[vitalybuka]

test/fuzzer/dso.test

2 ↗

(On Diff #151294)

can you use 1 and 2 to make it look nicer?

[george.karpenkov]

test/fuzzer/dso.test

2 ↗

(On Diff #151294)

OK

compiler-rt/trunk/test/fuzzer/dso.test

-RUN: %cpp_compiler %S/DSO1.cpp -fPIC -shared -o %t-DSO1.so
-RUN: %cpp_compiler %S/DSO2.cpp -fPIC -shared -o %t-DSO2.so
-RUN: %cpp_compiler %S/DSOTestMain.cpp %S/DSOTestExtra.cpp -L. %t-DSO1.so %t-DSO2.so -o %t-DSOTest
+RUN: %cpp_compiler %S/DSO1.cpp -fPIC %ld_flags_rpath_so1 -shared -o %dynamiclib1
+RUN: %cpp_compiler %S/DSO2.cpp -fPIC %ld_flags_rpath_so2 -shared -o %dynamiclib2
+RUN: %cpp_compiler %S/DSOTestMain.cpp %S/DSOTestExtra.cpp %ld_flags_rpath_exe1 %ld_flags_rpath_exe2 -o %t-DSOTest
 
 RUN: not %run %t-DSOTest 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=DSO
 DSO: INFO: Loaded 3 modules
 DSO: BINGO

compiler-rt/trunk/test/fuzzer/dump_coverage.test

 UNSUPPORTED: freebsd
-RUN: %cpp_compiler -fsanitize-coverage=0 -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard %S/DSO1.cpp -fPIC -shared -o %t-DSO1.so
-RUN: %cpp_compiler -fsanitize-coverage=0 -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard %S/DSO2.cpp -fPIC -shared -o %t-DSO2.so
-RUN: %cpp_compiler -fsanitize-coverage=0 -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard %S/DSOTestMain.cpp %S/DSOTestExtra.cpp -L. %t-DSO1.so %t-DSO2.so -o %t-DSOTest
+RUN: %cpp_compiler -fsanitize-coverage=0 -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard %S/DSO1.cpp -fPIC -shared -o %dynamiclib1 %ld_flags_rpath_so1
+RUN: %cpp_compiler -fsanitize-coverage=0 -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard %S/DSO2.cpp -fPIC -shared -o %dynamiclib2 %ld_flags_rpath_so2
+RUN: %cpp_compiler -fsanitize-coverage=0 -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard %S/DSOTestMain.cpp %S/DSOTestExtra.cpp %ld_flags_rpath_exe1 %ld_flags_rpath_exe2 -o %t-DSOTest
 
 RUN: %cpp_compiler -fsanitize-coverage=0 -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc-guard %S/NullDerefTest.cpp -o %t-NullDerefTest
 
 RUN: rm -rf %t_workdir && mkdir -p %t_workdir
 RUN: env ASAN_OPTIONS=coverage_dir='"%t_workdir"' not %t-NullDerefTest -dump_coverage=1 2>&1 | FileCheck %s
 RUN: sancov -covered-functions %t-NullDerefTest* %t_workdir/*.sancov | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=SANCOV
 RUN: env ASAN_OPTIONS=coverage_dir='"%t_workdir"' %t-DSOTest -dump_coverage=1 -runs=0 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=DSO
 RUN: env ASAN_OPTIONS=coverage_dir='"%t_workdir"' not %t-NullDerefTest -dump_coverage=0 2>&1 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=NOCOV
 
 CHECK: SanitizerCoverage: {{.*}}NullDerefTest.{{.*}}.sancov: {{.*}} PCs written
 SANCOV: LLVMFuzzerTestOneInput
 
 DSO: SanitizerCoverage: {{.*}}DSOTest.{{.*}}.sancov: {{.*}} PCs written
-DSO-DAG: SanitizerCoverage: {{.*}}DSO1.{{.*}}.sancov: {{.*}} PCs written
-DSO-DAG: SanitizerCoverage: {{.*}}DSO2.{{.*}}.sancov: {{.*}} PCs written
+DSO-DAG: SanitizerCoverage: {{.*}}.{{.*}}.sancov: {{.*}} PCs written
+DSO-DAG: SanitizerCoverage: {{.*}}2.{{.*}}.sancov: {{.*}} PCs written
 
 NOCOV-NOT: SanitizerCoverage: {{.*}} PCs written