Update line numbers in .good for #24136 #24157
Merged
Conversation
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
Signed-off-by: Vassily Litvinov <vasslitvinov@users.noreply.github.com>
e-kayrakli
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2024
vasslitvinov
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 18, 2024
This PR reacts to #24127 analogously to #24157, following the same argument in favor of changing the line numbers vs. introducing a prediff. Additionally, it reflects a reduction in the allocation/freeing size of `[domain(1,int(64),one)] int(64)` from 168 to 160 bytes. I did not investigate where that comes from. reviewed, although favored the prediff solution: @mppf
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR updates .good files with line numbers that changed due to #24136.
Could we instead prediff-out these line numbers?
Yes, by copying from one of multiple existing prediff scripts (possibly using a more specific path) that contain this:
SHOULD we prediff-out the these line numbers?
Citing Engin, "this is one of those cases where it is not as clear to me: this is a memory diagnostic test, and it is kind of important to see which line numbers are producing the message." So I choose to retain the (very mild) maintenance burden of keeping the explicit line numbers in order to provide more robust testing.
For a general background, we apply the above prediff conversion in 50+ .prediff and PREDIFF scripts. Furthermore we convert such line numbers automatically when comparing against .bad files, see
diff-ignoring-module-line-numbers. We may want to make this conversion automatic for .good files as well, which I am leaving outside the scope of this PR.