[PATCH 0/4] Fix library testsuite compilation for build sysroot

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

Hi,

This patch series addresses a problem with the testsuite compiler being
set up across libatomic, libffi, libgo, libgomp with no correlation
whatsoever to the target compiler being used in GCC compilation.
Consequently there in no arrangement made to set up the compilation
sysroot according to the build sysroot specified for GCC compilation,
causing a catastrophic failure across the testsuites affected from the
inability to link executables.

The fix is based on a similar arrangement already made for passing
autoconf output variables in libgomp, and uses the GCC_UNDER_TEST (or
GOC_UNDER_TEST, as applicable) TCL variable already used across several
GCC library testsuites.

Verified with a cross-compiler configured for the `riscv-linux-gnu'
target and the `x86_64-linux-gnu' host and using RISC-V/Linux QEMU in the
user emulation mode as the target board. Also no change in results with
`x86_64-linux-gnu' native regression testing.

See individual change descriptions for details.

OK to apply to the GCC repo (for libraries maintained externally I'll be
happy to assist with any merging required, although given that these
changes are confined to autoconf/automake scriptery they should be
straightforward to apply, barring any conflicts in generated files)?

Maciej

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

Fix a problem with the libatomic testsuite using a method to determine
the compiler to use resulting in the tool being different from one the
library has been built with, and causing a catastrophic failure from the
lack of a suitable `--sysroot=' option where the `--with-build-sysroot='
configuration option has been used to build the compiler resulting in

the inability to link executables.

Address this problem by providing a DejaGNU configuration file defining
the compiler to use, via the GCC_UNDER_TEST TCL variable, set from $CC
by autoconf, which will have all the required options set for the target
compiler to build executables in the environment configured, removing
failures like:

.../bin/riscv64-linux-gnu-ld: cannot find crt1.o: No such file or directory
.../bin/riscv64-linux-gnu-ld: cannot find -lm
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
compiler exited with status 1
FAIL: libatomic.c/atomic-compare-exchange-1.c (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
.../bin/riscv64-linux-gnu-ld: cannot find crt1.o: No such file or directory
.../bin/riscv64-linux-gnu-ld: cannot find -lm

UNRESOLVED: libatomic.c/atomic-compare-exchange-1.c compilation failed to produce executable

and bringing overall test results for the `riscv64-linux-gnu' target
(here with the `x86_64-linux-gnu' host and RISC-V QEMU in the Linux user
emulation mode as the target board) from:

=== libatomic Summary ===

# of unexpected failures 27
# of unresolved testcases 27

to:

=== libatomic Summary ===

# of expected passes 54

libatomic/
* configure.ac: Add testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp to
output files.
* configure: Regenerate.
* testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp.in: New file.
* testsuite/Makefile.am (EXTRA_DEJAGNU_SITE_CONFIG): New
variable.
* testsuite/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
---
libatomic/configure | 3 +++
libatomic/configure.ac | 1 +
libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.am | 2 ++
libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.in | 5 ++++-
libatomic/testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp.in | 1 +
5 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

gcc-test-libatomic-gcc-under-test.diff
Index: gcc/libatomic/configure
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libatomic/configure
+++ gcc/libatomic/configure
@@ -15701,6 +15701,8 @@ fi

ac_config_files="$ac_config_files Makefile testsuite/Makefile"

+ac_config_files="$ac_config_files testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp"
+
cat >confcache <<\_ACEOF
# This file is a shell script that caches the results of configure
# tests run on this system so they can be shared between configure
@@ -16772,6 +16774,7 @@ do
"gstdint.h") CONFIG_COMMANDS="$CONFIG_COMMANDS gstdint.h" ;;
"Makefile") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES Makefile" ;;
"testsuite/Makefile") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES testsuite/Makefile" ;;
+ "testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp" ;;

*) as_fn_error $? "invalid argument: \`$ac_config_target'" "$LINENO" 5;;
esac
Index: gcc/libatomic/configure.ac
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libatomic/configure.ac
+++ gcc/libatomic/configure.ac
@@ -279,4 +279,5 @@ else
fi

AC_CONFIG_FILES(Makefile testsuite/Makefile)
+AC_CONFIG_FILES(testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp)
AC_OUTPUT
Index: gcc/libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.am
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.am
+++ gcc/libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.am
@@ -11,3 +11,5 @@ EXPECT = $(shell if test -f $(top_buildd
_RUNTEST = $(shell if test -f $(top_srcdir)/../dejagnu/runtest; then \
echo $(top_srcdir)/../dejagnu/runtest; else echo runtest; fi)
RUNTEST = $(_RUNTEST) $(AM_RUNTESTFLAGS)
+
+EXTRA_DEJAGNU_SITE_CONFIG = libatomic-test-support.exp
Index: gcc/libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.in
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.in
+++ gcc/libatomic/testsuite/Makefile.in
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ am__configure_deps = $(am__aclocal_m4_de
DIST_COMMON = $(srcdir)/Makefile.am
mkinstalldirs = $(SHELL) $(top_srcdir)/../mkinstalldirs
CONFIG_HEADER = $(top_builddir)/auto-config.h
-CONFIG_CLEAN_FILES =
+CONFIG_CLEAN_FILES = libatomic-test-support.exp
CONFIG_CLEAN_VPATH_FILES =
AM_V_P = $(am__v_P_@AM_V@)
am__v_P_ = $(am__v_P_@AM_DEFAULT_V@)
@@ -277,6 +277,7 @@ _RUNTEST = $(shell if test -f $(top_srcd
echo $(top_srcdir)/../dejagnu/runtest; else echo runtest; fi)

RUNTEST = $(_RUNTEST) $(AM_RUNTESTFLAGS)
+EXTRA_DEJAGNU_SITE_CONFIG = libatomic-test-support.exp
all: all-am

.SUFFIXES:
@@ -309,6 +310,8 @@ $(top_srcdir)/configure: @MAINTAINER_MOD
$(ACLOCAL_M4): @MAINTAINER_MODE_TRUE@ $(am__aclocal_m4_deps)
cd $(top_builddir) && $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) am--refresh
$(am__aclocal_m4_deps):
+libatomic-test-support.exp: $(top_builddir)/config.status $(srcdir)/libatomic-test-support.exp.in
+ cd $(top_builddir) && $(SHELL) ./config.status $(subdir)/$@

mostlyclean-libtool:
-rm -f *.lo
Index: gcc/libatomic/testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp.in
===================================================================
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/libatomic/testsuite/libatomic-test-support.exp.in
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+set GCC_UNDER_TEST {@CC@}

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

Fix a problem with the libffi testsuite using a method to determine the

compiler to use resulting in the tool being different from one the
library has been built with, and causing a catastrophic failure from the

inability to actually choose any compiler at all in a cross-compilation
configuration.

Address this problem by providing a DejaGNU configuration file defining
the compiler to use, via the GCC_UNDER_TEST TCL variable, set from $CC
by autoconf, which will have all the required options set for the target
compiler to build executables in the environment configured, removing
failures like:

FAIL: libffi.call/closure_fn0.c -W -Wall -Wno-psabi -O0 (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
default_target_compile: No compiler to compile with
UNRESOLVED: libffi.call/closure_fn0.c -W -Wall -Wno-psabi -O0 compilation failed to produce executable

and bringing overall test results for the `riscv64-linux-gnu' target

(here with the `x86_64-linux-gnu' host and RISC-V QEMU in the Linux user
emulation mode as the target board) from:

=== libffi Summary ===

# of unexpected failures 708
# of unresolved testcases 708
# of unsupported tests 30

to:

=== libffi Summary ===

# of expected passes 1934
# of unsupported tests 28

Also respect the TOOL_EXECUTABLE TCL variable for a standalone run via
`runtest' and remove an unused TOOL_OPTIONS TCL variable instance.

libffi/
* configure.ac: Add testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp to output
files.
* configure: Regenerate.
* testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp.in: New file.

* testsuite/Makefile.am (EXTRA_DEJAGNU_SITE_CONFIG): New
variable.
* testsuite/Makefile.in: Regenerate.

* testsuite/lib/libffi.exp (libffi-init): Handle GCC_UNDER_TEST.
(libffi_target_compile): Likewise.
---
libffi/configure | 3 ++-
libffi/configure.ac | 2 +-
libffi/testsuite/Makefile.am | 2 ++
libffi/testsuite/Makefile.in | 5 ++++-
libffi/testsuite/lib/libffi.exp | 16 ++++++++++++++--
libffi/testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp.in | 1 +
6 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

gcc-test-libffi-gcc-under-test.diff
Index: gcc/libffi/configure
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libffi/configure
+++ gcc/libffi/configure
@@ -16635,7 +16635,7 @@ ac_config_commands="$ac_config_commands
ac_config_links="$ac_config_links include/ffitarget.h:src/$TARGETDIR/ffitarget.h"


-ac_config_files="$ac_config_files include/Makefile include/ffi.h Makefile testsuite/Makefile man/Makefile libffi.pc"
+ac_config_files="$ac_config_files include/Makefile include/ffi.h Makefile testsuite/Makefile testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp man/Makefile libffi.pc"


cat >confcache <<\_ACEOF
@@ -17802,6 +17802,7 @@ do
"include/ffi.h") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES include/ffi.h" ;;

"Makefile") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES Makefile" ;;
"testsuite/Makefile") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES testsuite/Makefile" ;;

+ "testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp" ;;
"man/Makefile") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES man/Makefile" ;;
"libffi.pc") CONFIG_FILES="$CONFIG_FILES libffi.pc" ;;

Index: gcc/libffi/configure.ac
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libffi/configure.ac
+++ gcc/libffi/configure.ac
@@ -368,6 +368,6 @@ test -d src/$TARGETDIR || mkdir src/$TAR

AC_CONFIG_LINKS(include/ffitarget.h:src/$TARGETDIR/ffitarget.h)

-AC_CONFIG_FILES(include/Makefile include/ffi.h Makefile testsuite/Makefile man/Makefile libffi.pc)
+AC_CONFIG_FILES(include/Makefile include/ffi.h Makefile testsuite/Makefile testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp man/Makefile libffi.pc)

AC_OUTPUT
Index: gcc/libffi/testsuite/Makefile.am
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libffi/testsuite/Makefile.am
+++ gcc/libffi/testsuite/Makefile.am
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ RUNTEST = `if [ -f $(top_srcdir)/../deja
echo $(top_srcdir)/../dejagnu/runtest ; \
else echo runtest; fi`

+EXTRA_DEJAGNU_SITE_CONFIG = libffi-test-support.exp
+
AM_RUNTESTFLAGS =

CLEANFILES = *.exe core* *.log *.sum
Index: gcc/libffi/testsuite/Makefile.in
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libffi/testsuite/Makefile.in
+++ gcc/libffi/testsuite/Makefile.in
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ am__configure_deps = $(am__aclocal_m4_de

DIST_COMMON = $(srcdir)/Makefile.am
mkinstalldirs = $(SHELL) $(top_srcdir)/../mkinstalldirs

CONFIG_HEADER = $(top_builddir)/fficonfig.h
-CONFIG_CLEAN_FILES =
+CONFIG_CLEAN_FILES = libffi-test-support.exp

CONFIG_CLEAN_VPATH_FILES =
AM_V_P = $(am__v_P_@AM_V@)
am__v_P_ = $(am__v_P_@AM_DEFAULT_V@)

@@ -278,6 +278,7 @@ RUNTEST = `if [ -f $(top_srcdir)/../deja
echo $(top_srcdir)/../dejagnu/runtest ; \
else echo runtest; fi`

+EXTRA_DEJAGNU_SITE_CONFIG = libffi-test-support.exp
CLEANFILES = *.exe core* *.log *.sum
EXTRA_DIST = config/default.exp libffi.call/cls_19byte.c \
libffi.call/cls_align_longdouble_split.c \
@@ -389,6 +390,8 @@ $(top_srcdir)/configure: @MAINTAINER_MOD

$(ACLOCAL_M4): @MAINTAINER_MODE_TRUE@ $(am__aclocal_m4_deps)
cd $(top_builddir) && $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) am--refresh
$(am__aclocal_m4_deps):

+libffi-test-support.exp: $(top_builddir)/config.status $(srcdir)/libffi-test-support.exp.in

+ cd $(top_builddir) && $(SHELL) ./config.status $(subdir)/$@

mostlyclean-libtool:
-rm -f *.lo

Index: gcc/libffi/testsuite/lib/libffi.exp
===================================================================
--- gcc.orig/libffi/testsuite/lib/libffi.exp
+++ gcc/libffi/testsuite/lib/libffi.exp
@@ -99,7 +99,8 @@ proc libffi-init { args } {
global blddirffi
global objdir
global blddircxx
- global TOOL_OPTIONS
+ global TOOL_EXECUTABLE
+ global GCC_UNDER_TEST
global tool
global libffi_include
global libffi_link_flags
@@ -123,7 +124,15 @@ proc libffi-init { args } {
set ld_library_path "."
append ld_library_path ":${gccdir}"

- set compiler "${gccdir}/xgcc"
+ if ![info exists GCC_UNDER_TEST] then {
+ if [info exists TOOL_EXECUTABLE] {
+ set GCC_UNDER_TEST $TOOL_EXECUTABLE
+ } else {
+ set GCC_UNDER_TEST "[find_gcc]"
+ }
+ }
+
+ set compiler [lindex $GCC_UNDER_TEST 0]
if { [is_remote host] == 0 && [which $compiler] != 0 } {
foreach i "[exec $compiler --print-multi-lib]" {
set mldir ""
@@ -175,11 +184,14 @@ proc libffi_target_compile { source dest
global srcdir
global blddirffi
global TOOL_OPTIONS
+ global GCC_UNDER_TEST
global libffi_link_flags
global libffi_include
global target_triplet


+ lappend options "compiler=$GCC_UNDER_TEST"
+
if { [target_info needs_status_wrapper]!="" && [info exists gluefile] } {
lappend options "libs=${gluefile}"
lappend options "ldflags=$wrap_flags"
Index: gcc/libffi/testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp.in
===================================================================
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/libffi/testsuite/libffi-test-support.exp.in

[Ulderico Cirello]

Hi Maciej,

Go's project doesn't take mail patches for changes. Please use gerrit ( https://go-review.googlesource.com/ ).

Thanks

        - ccf

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-dev/alpine.LFD.2.21.1911081714120.13542%40redsun52.ssa.fujisawa.hgst.com.

[Kaz Kylheku (libffi)]

On 2019-11-11 10:15, Ulderico Cirello wrote:
> Hi Maciej,
>
> Go's project doesn't take mail patches for changes.

Is it that they'd have to read man pages and learn how to use common
utilities?

Or that nobody has written a "patch in Go" yet?

[Ian Lance Taylor]

On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:15 AM Ulderico Cirello
<ulderi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Go's project doesn't take mail patches for changes. Please use gerrit ( https://go-review.googlesource.com/ ).

These patches are for gccgo, not the gc toolchain. They should
probably have been sent to gofrontend-dev rather than golang-dev. The
gccgo repo does take patches via e-mail; I route them through Gerrit
as needed.

Ian

[Ian Lance Taylor]

Please be polite; thanks. There are many advantages to using Gerrit
for code review. It has nothing to do with reading man pages or using
the patch program.

Ian

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Ulderico Cirello wrote:

> Go's project doesn't take mail patches for changes. Please use gerrit (
> https://go-review.googlesource.com/ ).

Thanks for your reply; this is however too much effort for my limited
resources and a one-off change.

The reason is I'm not actively working on Go and I have only enabled Go
frontend compilation/verification for my RISC-V effort in case there is a
regression caused by a machine backend change that happens to only trigger
for the Go frontend so that it does not go unnoticed.

I have provided this change in a hope it is useful to the community and
in these circumstances hopefully someone actually interested in Go will
pick up and merge this change; otherwise I will drop my local change and
consequently Go verification once GCC 10 has been released.

Thank you for your understanding.

Maciej

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:

> > Go's project doesn't take mail patches for changes. Please use gerrit ( https://go-review.googlesource.com/ ).
>
> These patches are for gccgo, not the gc toolchain. They should
> probably have been sent to gofrontend-dev rather than golang-dev. The
> gccgo repo does take patches via e-mail; I route them through Gerrit
> as needed.

I may have misinterpreted this paragraph[1]:

"Submitting Changes

Changes to the Go frontend should follow the same process as for the
main Go repository, only for the gofrontend project and the
gofront...@googlegroups.com mailing list rather than the go project
and the golan...@googlegroups.com mailing list. Those changes will
then be merged into the GCC sources."

Sorry about that; I think it might benefit from a rewrite for clarity
though.

References:

[1] "Contributing to the gccgo frontend - The Go Programming Language",
<https://golang.org/doc/gccgo_contribute.html>

Maciej

[Kaz Kylheku (libffi)]

On 2019-11-11 10:34, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:31 AM Kaz Kylheku (libffi)
> <382-72...@kylheku.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2019-11-11 10:15, Ulderico Cirello wrote:
>> > Hi Maciej,
>> >
>> > Go's project doesn't take mail patches for changes.
>>
>> Is it that they'd have to read man pages and learn how to use common
>> utilities?
>>
>> Or that nobody has written a "patch in Go" yet?
>
> Please be polite; thanks.

Ah, that would be, "thank you for your bug report and patch".

[Ian Lance Taylor]

The paragraph seems reasonable clear to me, so I'm obviously missing
something. Can you suggest a clearer rewrite? Thanks.

Ian