On Wed, 10 Sept 2025 at 12:23, Iain Sandoe <idsan...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 10 Sep 2025, at 11:12, Richard Earnshaw (lists) > > <richard.earns...@arm.com> wrote: > > > > On 10/09/2025 10:54, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >> If the results include several configurations (schedule of > >> variations), do not report summary lines as duplicates. Indeed with > >> several configurations, it's likely that the results contain the same > >> > >> # of expected passes XXXXX > >> > >> The patch just keeps lines starting with test state prefix to avoid > >> this problem. > >> > >> contrib/ChangeLog: > >> > >> * compare_tests: Improve non-unique tests report when testing > >> several configurations. > > > > OK. > > Now we have this facility - and it is firing on my testboxes (since i use this > script to post-process [per .sum file for stability]) - I looked through a > few of > the reported cases and they seem genuiene - but particularly in respect of > dg-final ones, hard to see how they can be disambiguated without we make > dg-final able to add some tag to differentiate.
I must confess I didn't look at the list in detail, hoping that people would gradually / promptly fix things of interest to then ;-) > > are there any plans to deal with this new reported data? No plan on my side at least, I just wrote this patch and the previous after discussing (on- and off-list), and that seemed very quick to do ;-) > if not, I’d welcome a switch on the script - so that one could at least elect > only to report new dups .. new dups as in "new dups compared to the list of dups of them previous run" ? or just disable this new facility (and come back to the behaviour before my previous patch? Thanks, Christophe > > thanks > Iain >
