Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] math: Add support for auto static math tests

[Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>]

* Adhemerval Zanella Netto:

> On 22/03/24 03:46, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Joseph Myers:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2024, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>>>
>>>> It basically copy the already in place rules for dynamic tests
>>>> for auto-generated math tests for all support types.  To avoid
>>>> the need to duplicate .inc files, a .SECONDEXPANSION rules is
>>>> adeed for the gen-libm-test.py generation.
>>>
>>> Running the autogenerated tests seems overly complicated when the goal is 
>>> simply to verify that linking a call succeeds.
>> 
>> Right.  And I would prefer if we could mark compat/otherwise non-static
>> symbols in the ABI lists and use those for testing static linking.
>> 
>
> That was my first approach, but then as an experiment I enabled static
> build for most of math tests and unexpectedly it has shows some failures
> on x86_64:
>
> FAIL: math/test-float64x-acos
> FAIL: math/test-float64x-log10
> FAIL: math/test-float64x-log2
> FAIL: math/test-float64x-y0
> FAIL: math/test-float64x-y1
> FAIL: math/test-ldouble-acos
> FAIL: math/test-ldouble-log10
> FAIL: math/test-ldouble-log2
> FAIL: math/test-ldouble-y0
> FAIL: math/test-ldouble-y1
>
> $ cat math/test-float64x-acos.out
> testing _Float64x (without inline functions)
> Failure: acos (max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
> Failure: acos (-max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
> Failure: acos_downward (max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
> Failure: acos_downward (-max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
> Failure: acos_towardzero (max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
> Failure: acos_towardzero (-max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
> Failure: acos_upward (max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
> Failure: acos_upward (-max_value): Exception "Overflow" set
>
> My plan was to eventually track down what might be happening here, and
> the currently autogenerated tests gave me a nice scaffolding to add coverage
> tests.

Interesting.  On the other hand, getting --disable-shared to work and
just run the *entire* test suite could provide value, too.  The last
time we discussed this we weren't sure if we had static-specific
failures, but your example shows that we do.

Thanks,
Florian