Turns out the test was not correct, I had to adjust the test to work. I
also added CHECK-LABELs for better error messages from FileCheck while
I'm here.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
- Build Status
Buildable 28487 Build 28486: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
LGTM. Thanks for catching this, I am surprised that those typos slipped through ... FYI. @HLJ2009
Two things here.
- Why is CHECK-NEXT not being used?
- Why is ./utils/update_llc_test_checks.py not being used? That dramatically reduces chances of things like this, and spares one from actually having to manually write proper check lines. (thus improves test coverage. one will of course still need to verify that the checks are correct.)
Why is CHECK-NEXT not being used?
Why is ./utils/update_llc_test_checks.py not being used? That dramatically reduces chances of things like this, and spares one from actually having to manually write proper check lines. (thus improves test coverage. one will of course still need to verify that the checks are correct.)
Good questions, I think this was tricky and it should be due to "\0A" in the inline asm here.
The output will have empty lines after each assembly line.
#APP xxsldwi vs0, v2, v2, 3 xscvspdp f0, f0 fctiw f0, f0 mffprd r3, f0 #NO_APP
So, we can NOT use CHECK-NEXT,
and the script ./utils/update_llc_test_checks.py also can NOT handle it well either:
the output of scripts will have empty string CHECK-NEXT, then causing failures.
inlineasm-vsx-reg.ll:8:15: error: found empty check string with prefix 'CHECK:' ; CHECK-NEXT: ^
But agree that we should recommend using CHECK-NEXT and ./utils/update_llc_test_checks.py if possible.