Re: [avr-llvm-devel] Regression tests

[Borja F. <bor...@gm...>]

How many tests failures are you getting now?
I'm getting 11, 10 from clang due to address space stuff (you'll need to
patch clang to get those) and 1 from llvm.

2012/5/4 Nicklas Bo Jensen <nbj...@gm...>

> Ah, perfect.
>
> I would actually guess that you need to run "make check-all" before being
> able to test new tests individually. Sorry :)
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...>wrote:
>
>> Nevermind, got it.
>>
>>
>> 2012/5/4 Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...>
>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> One thing, i dont have llvm-lit in that dir, am I supposed to build llvm
>>> with an addtional param or something in order to get it?
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/5/4 Nicklas Bo Jensen <nbj...@gm...>
>>>
>>>> Ok, I've committed now. To only run the AVR specific tests run
>>>> something like:
>>>>
>>>> ./build/Debug+Asserts/bin/llvm-lit llvm/test/CodeGen/AVR/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Oh a small one I've just noticed, leave only 1 newline between tests
>>>>> not 2.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/5/4 Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok they look great now, I don't have any other objections. Please
>>>>>> commit this test to SVN, post your SF username here so that Eric or John
>>>>>> can give you commit permissions. Once it gets commited I'll check if I need
>>>>>> to add any pattern specific tests to it, these tests are corner cases of
>>>>>> some instructions.
>>>>>> Before commiting it, remove the testcases dir with all the files
>>>>>> there, and create a new one called test/CodeGen/AVR, and place your file
>>>>>> there, just to keep the same structure like in llvm's repo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> About the rest of tests to do, from that list remove mul and division
>>>>>> for now, mul isn't yet implemented and division can come later. Sub tests
>>>>>> should be very similar to add, then add binary ops (or, and, xor). Add
>>>>>> calling convention tests (argument passing through regs and stack, return
>>>>>> values for each value type, calls). Memory operations, etc...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are quite a few tests to add, but for now do the sub and binary
>>>>>> op tests and we'll discuss the others by then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2012/5/4 Nicklas Bo Jensen <nbj...@gm...>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Sure
>>>>>>> 2) Yes, I've followed the msp430 backend that does include it. I've
>>>>>>> removed it now.
>>>>>>> 3) Again, I've moved the CHECK lines, but it differs from backend to
>>>>>>> backend.
>>>>>>> 4) Done
>>>>>>> 5) Done
>>>>>>> 6) Done
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will continue working other tests, which do we need? Something
>>>>>>> like(and please add/comment):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Sub
>>>>>>> -division(Only working for multiples of 2?)
>>>>>>> -mult
>>>>>>> -Return argument(In a few variants)
>>>>>>> -and
>>>>>>> -or
>>>>>>> -xor
>>>>>>> -increment
>>>>>>> -branching?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Nicklas
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Obviously in the last line I meant adiw or subi/sbci pair, add for
>>>>>>>> immediates doesn't exist for imms greater than 63
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2012/5/2 Borja Ferrer <bor...@gm...>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They look good, very nice :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Some small details and nitpicks:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) I think it's not necessary to add the reg_reg_imm variant
>>>>>>>>> because you covered it with the other two tests.
>>>>>>>>> 2) Do the tests work if you remove the target triple line? I've
>>>>>>>>> seen other backends don't include it.
>>>>>>>>> 3) Move the CHECK lines after the function prototype like other
>>>>>>>>> backends do.
>>>>>>>>> 4) In every CHECK line, can you remove the tabs between the instr
>>>>>>>>> mnemonic and the first operand and add a single space? (I'm unsure about
>>>>>>>>> this because i dont know if CHECK eats spaces). Also for the future, the
>>>>>>>>> llvm coding standards says to config your editor to replace tabs with
>>>>>>>>> spaces, so it's a good moment time to do it.
>>>>>>>>> 5) Oh and the most important one, please add this in only one
>>>>>>>>> file, add.ll or something like that, so we can keep this convention in the
>>>>>>>>> future, otherwise we'll end having too many test files.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Something that should be covered is, when doing 16 bit additions
>>>>>>>>> we can use adiw or add depending on the imm value, can you cover this
>>>>>>>>> aswell?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2012/5/1 John Myers <ato...@gm...>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Nicklas Bo Jensen <
>>>>>>>>>> nbj...@gm...> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have successfully been able to compile your testcases
>>>>>>>>>>> (/avr-llvm/testcases/*.ll) to something looking like valid avr assembler.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How should I test/simulate the assembler? I get errors when
>>>>>>>>>>> trying to simulate the generated assembler in AVRStudio. Perhaps they use a
>>>>>>>>>>> different assembler?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> avr-llvm produces GNU assembler syntax, which is different then
>>>>>>>>>> the Atmel assembler syntax.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Eventually we could support multiple asm syntax's like the X86
>>>>>>>>>> target does.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>