On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> Comments before I start on an implementation?
I'd suggest to await the conclusion of the debate: I *think*
I've proved that dg-timeout-factor is already active as intended
(all parts of a test), specifically when the compilation result
is executed (f
On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > > The test execution timeout is different from the tool execution timeout
> > > where it is GCC execution that is being guarded against taking excessive
> > > amount of time on the test host r
Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
The test execution timeout is different from the tool execution timeout
where it is GCC execution that is being guarded against taking excessive
amount of time on the test host rather than the resulting test case
execu
"Maciej W. Rozycki" writes:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
>> > The test execution timeout is different from the tool execution timeout
>> > where it is GCC execution that is being guarded against taking excessive
>> > amount of time on the test host rather than the resulting
On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > The test execution timeout is different from the tool execution timeout
> > where it is GCC execution that is being guarded against taking excessive
> > amount of time on the test host rather than the resulting test case
> > executable run on t
