-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 265
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rework Dynamic Analysis and sanitize testing #4681
Merged
+139
−163
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9b75c31
Ignore predetermined failing test and check pointer before use
byrnHDF c5c17cd
Rework Analysis process
byrnHDF 5a87ec7
Remove unused file
byrnHDF ee0d26e
Merge branch 'develop' of https://github.com/HDFGroup/hdf5.git into d…
byrnHDF File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need to be checking whether an analysis tool is used when tests that are expected to fail are being tested? Surely there's a better way to do this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The trouble with these tests are that the sanitzer will avoid the runtest.cmake macro and therefore the test will not fail. I could execute the test and skip the property setting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What is it about the sanitizers that causes them to not run through the normal testing macros/framework? Do they do more than just add in the
-fsanitize=address
flag for example?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am investigating that now - it might just be valgrind that has the issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks like the sanitizers do not have a problem with the macros - so will convert the checks to MEMCHECKER only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Checking for a specific analysis tool doesn't seem much better either. I don't necessarily want to suggest adding another test macro for this purpose, but it's not great that anybody adding new tests needs to know that tests which are expected to fail have to be wrapped in
if (NOT HDF5_USING_ANALYSIS_TOOL)
or similar. It should be simpler than that.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reworked this whole analysis as sanitisers do not have the problems that valgrind has.
In fact, I think the sanitizers negate the need to support valgrind limitations and even the MEMCHECKER checks should just be eliminated.