Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

Reading Lewis' patch and the original patch a bit more carefully I think the patch I suggested should have used `additional_flags` instead of `ldflags`. Outside of that -- would any maintainer on Cc be OK with one of our patches going in? On 1/3/25 22:05, Lewis Hyatt wrote: External email:

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 05:48:12PM +, Matthew Malcomson wrote: > On 1/3/25 17:14, Joseph Myers wrote: > > Does this patch cover everything dealt with by > > > > ([PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Remove build directory path from tes

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

Ah -- I didn't notice that patch. It looks like both do essentially the same thing. That one identifies the use of the c++ test runner by checking for the presence of the `lang_test_file` variable, and in that case `libitm_target_compile` adds the options, while in my patch the c++ test runne

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

Does this patch cover everything dealt with by ([PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Remove build directory path from test names), or would some separate fix for that issue still be needed in the presence of this patch? -- Joseph S.

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

Hi Richard, I had a little bit more of a think about this patch, and have changed my mind on how problematic it is to use ALWAYS_CFLAGS w.r.t. naming. It is already used by the C++ tests. If we're happy to use that name then we don't need to introduce a new save/restore. Another reason I think

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

Matthew Malcomson writes: > On 1/2/25 12:08, Richard Sandiford wrote: >>> +# This set in order to give libitm.c++/c++.exp a nicely named flag to >>> set >>> +# when adding C++ options. >>> +set TEST_ALWAYS_FLAGS "" >> >> This looked odd at first glance. By unconditionally writing ""

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

On 1/2/25 12:08, Richard Sandiford wrote: +# This set in order to give libitm.c++/c++.exp a nicely named flag to set +# when adding C++ options. +set TEST_ALWAYS_FLAGS "" This looked odd at first glance. By unconditionally writing "" to the variable, it seems to subvert the save

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: libitm: Adjust how libitm.c++ passes link flags

writes: > From: Matthew Malcomson > > For the `gcc` and `g++` tools we often pass -B/path/to/object/dir in via > `TEST_ALWAYS_FLAGS` (see e.g. asan.exp where this is set). > In libitm.c++/c++.exp we pass that -B flag via the `tool_flags` argument > to `dg-runtest`. > > Passing as the `tool_flags`