This test has apparently been broken for years, but we never noticed before
because it's a long test and long tests approximately never get run.
llvm-svn: 300151
Remove "REQUIRES: long_tests" from test/Driver/response-file.c since it is now about 10x faster. (We can add that back if it's still too slow for some buildbot.)
llvm-svn: 300136
Summary:
It seems that rL292518 introduced a RUN: false, but the continuation rL292545
forgot to remove it back.
This has flown under the radar, because it's a long test and doesn't get
executed by default during sanity testing.
To test:
$ cd llvm_build
$ ./bin/llvm-lit --param run_long_tests=true tools/clang/test/Driver/response-file.c
@rsmith: have a look if this change is OK please.
Reviewers: bkramer
Reviewed By: bkramer
Subscribers: cfe-commits, rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28941
llvm-svn: 292600
Under this defect resolution, the injected-class-name of a class or class
template cannot be used except in very limited circumstances (when declaring a
constructor, in a nested-name-specifier, in a base-specifier, or in an
elaborated-type-specifier). This is apparently done to make parsing easier, but
it's a pain for us since we don't know whether a template-id using the
injected-class-name is valid at the point when we annotate it (we don't yet
know whether the template-id will become part of an elaborated-type-specifier).
As a tentative resolution to a perceived language defect, mem-initializer-ids
are added to the list of exceptions here (they generally follow the same rules
as base-specifiers).
When the reference to the injected-class-name uses the 'typename' or 'template'
keywords, we permit it to be used to name a type or template as an extension;
other compilers also accept some cases in this area. There are also a couple of
corner cases with dependent template names that we do not yet diagnose, but
which will also get this treatment.
llvm-svn: 292518
Summary:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=27396
This fixes an issue in response files where "\r\n" was being interpreted
as two EOL markers (i.e. we consumed the '\r' as terminating the
previous token, and then parsed the '\n' as a significant EOL). This
breaks response files where joined arguments get split across multiple
lines (like "-x\r\nc"). I also fixed an accidental issue in the
response-file.c test, where the response file is appended to, instead of
being overwritten.
Reviewers: rnk
Subscribers: danalbert, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19289
llvm-svn: 266840
Patch by Rafael Auler!
This patch addresses PR15171 and teaches Clang how to call other tools
with response files, when the command line exceeds system limits. This
is a problem for Windows systems, whose maximum command-line length is
32kb.
I introduce the concept of "response file support" for each Tool object.
A given Tool may have full support for response files (e.g. MSVC's
link.exe) or only support file names inside response files, but no flags
(e.g. Apple's ld64, as commented in PR15171), or no support at all (the
default case). Therefore, if you implement a toolchain in the clang
driver and you want clang to be able to use response files in your
tools, you must override a method (getReponseFileSupport()) to tell so.
I designed it to support different kinds of tools and
internationalisation needs:
- VS response files ( UTF-16 )
- GNU tools ( uses system's current code page, windows' legacy intl.
support, with escaped backslashes. On unix, fallback to UTF-8 )
- Clang itself ( UTF-16 on windows, UTF-8 on unix )
- ld64 response files ( only a limited file list, UTF-8 on unix )
With this design, I was able to test input file names with spaces and
international characters for Windows. When the linker input is large
enough, it creates a response file with the correct encoding. On a Mac,
to test ld64, I temporarily changed Clang's behavior to always use
response files regardless of the command size limit (avoiding using huge
command line inputs). I tested clang with the LLVM test suite (compiling
benchmarks) and it did fine.
Test Plan: A LIT test that tests proper response files support. This is
tricky, since, for Unix systems, we need a 2MB response file, otherwise
Clang will simply use regular arguments instead of a response file. To
do this, my LIT test generate the file on the fly by cloning many -DTEST
parameters until we have a 2MB file. I found out that processing 2MB of
arguments is pretty slow, it takes 1 minute using my notebook in a debug
build, or 10s in a Release build. Therefore, I also added "REQUIRES:
long_tests", so it will only run when the user wants to run long tests.
In the full discussion in
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130408/171463.html,
Rafael Espindola discusses a proper way to test
llvm::sys::argumentsFitWithinSystemLimits(), and, there, Chandler
suggests to use 10 times the current system limit (20MB resp file), so
we guarantee that the system will always use response file, even if a
new linux comes up that can handle a few more bytes of arguments.
However, by testing with a 20MB resp file, the test takes long 8 minutes
just to perform a silly check to see if the driver will use a response
file. I found it to be unreasonable. Thus, I discarded this approach and
uses a 2MB response file, which should be enough.
Reviewers: asl, rafael, silvas
Reviewed By: silvas
Subscribers: silvas, rnk, thakis, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4897
llvm-svn: 217792
Richard Smith