This is an archive of the discontinued LLVM Phabricator instance.

[llvm-objcopy][test] Fix tests when path contains "bar"
ClosedPublic

Authored by MaskRay on Jan 7 2020, 12:25 PM.

Details

Summary

Tests that use --implicit-check-not=bar should be improved to not make jlebar sad.

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

MaskRay created this revision.Jan 7 2020, 12:25 PM

Unit tests: pass. 61303 tests passed, 0 failed and 736 were skipped.

clang-tidy: pass.

clang-format: pass.

Build artifacts: diff.json, clang-tidy.txt, clang-format.patch, CMakeCache.txt, console-log.txt, test-results.xml

I left comments on D72357 instead

Ping:)

I'm waiting on @rupprecht's comments in D72357.

MaskRay added a subscriber: bbaren.Jan 30 2020, 5:56 PM

The argument in D72357 does not need to block this patch. I'll push this, as a straightforward improvement over the existing tests, so that @jlebar and @bbaren can be happy.

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state Needs Review.Jan 30 2020, 6:05 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

The argument in D72357 does not need to block this patch. I'll push this, as a straightforward improvement over the existing tests, so that @jlebar and @bbaren can be happy.

I feel like this kind of ignored specific feedback I had on the other review that applied equally here. Had I known about this review/commit, I would've objected to it on the same grounds.

Please use redirection in this and future tests to address issues like this to help make tests more resilient to interesting paths on developer/test machines.

The argument in D72357 does not need to block this patch. I'll push this, as a straightforward improvement over the existing tests, so that @jlebar and @bbaren can be happy.

I feel like this kind of ignored specific feedback I had on the other review that applied equally here. Had I known about this review/commit, I would've objected to it on the same grounds.

Please use redirection in this and future tests to address issues like this to help make tests more resilient to interesting paths on developer/test machines.

@dblaikie Almost all llvm-readobj tests do not use input redirection. @rupprecht and @dblaikie raised the concern but @jhenderson and @MaskRay did not think we should do that.

A future %t -> < %t change will not make this patch entirely meaningless. If @jhenderson and @MaskRay changed their mind, they might create a patch to fix all tests for consistency.
Postponing this patch (2 out of probably 400+ tests) can indeed make the file history a bit more tidy. But does that weigh a lot? What I felt a bit sad was that we left @jlebar and @bbaren's issues unresolved for such a long time. We also missed the release/10.x window. Now a random bar user will find check-llvm fail as well.