Reorganization of test suites for code maintainability about riscv-arch-test HOT 5 CLOSED

riscv-non-isa commented on August 16, 2024

Reorganization of test suites for code maintainability

from riscv-arch-test.

Comments (5)

jstraus59 commented on August 16, 2024

Today the rv32i, rv32im, rv32imc, rv64i, rv64im are in the right shape the others were quick ports of the riscv-isa-tests and hence too many macros, shared use between rv64 and rv32 and many includes - and they dont use any of the logging and assertion macros and do quite a simple signature based don pass fail in the test - so they in fact all need restructuring to adhere to the current as documented - they are all old style and were included as a simple quick and easy way of seeing who good the old, to-be-deprecated riscv-isa-tests I think maybe we could move these badly styled ones into another directory so they can be used. but so they don't confuse. eg: riscv/riscv-compliance/riscv-test-suite [rv32i, rv32im, rv32imc, rv64i, rv64im] riscv/riscv-compliance/riscv-test-suite-work-in-progress [rv32mi, rv32si, rv32ua, rv32uc, rv32ud, rv32uf, rv32ui] thanks Simon

…

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 1:06 AM Deborah Soung ***@***.***> wrote: I am curious if there is any intention to reorganize the test suites. Right now, this seems a bit superficial, but in the long run this may have an effect on this repo's maintainability. For example, the rv32si <https://github.com/riscv/riscv-compliance/tree/master/riscv-test-suite/rv32si> and the rv32mi <https://github.com/riscv/riscv-compliance/tree/master/riscv-test-suite/rv32mi> suites both have separate subdirectories called rv64si which appear not to be symlinked. This has so far caused at least one issue (#44 <#44>). Given this, - why are symlinks not being used? - why do these rv64* subdirectories not exist as their own suites? I.e., why is the rv64si directory inside of rv32si, for example, not its own test suite? - why does this layer of indirection exist in the rv32* directories? Is the intention to eventually pull the rv64* tests out into their own suites? Note: Beyond this superficial reorganization, some discussion of privileged/unprivileged test organization has occurred in #40 <#40>. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#45>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJrER7fXDpGF0Fsq_NV23Ul_4i0XKRTJks5vM2T2gaJpZM4a4YEX> .

-- ==================================================================== The information contained in this electronic mail message and any attachments hereto is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above or their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please immediately notify us by return message or by telephone and delete the original message from your mail system. Thank you. ====================================================================

from riscv-arch-test.

allenjbaum commented on August 16, 2024

The directory structure is pretty screwed up in my opinion.
The directories mentioned by Simon are mostly OK, though it isn't obvious that rv64i has only the unprivileged ops that exist in RV64i but don't exist in RV32i (i.e. all of the W ops).
On the other hand, all of the other rv32 tests have rv64 subdirectories inside of them, and those subdirectories should exist at the top level, not be a subdirectory. The feramework can make sure both are executed, but it would be a bit more clear if rv64i included rv32i tests (with the appropriate variable set, just as the rv32ux tests include rv64x tests (but at the wrong directory level)

from riscv-arch-test.

allenjbaum commented on August 16, 2024

This has been completely revamped under the new testformat spec and the riscof framework matches the new directory structure (or vice versa).
I'm not sure we want to close this now or when we get to v.2 of the spec

from riscv-arch-test.

allenjbaum commented on August 16, 2024

The recent merge of tests have completely revamped the directory structure as described in the test spec, and in riscv-compliance/riscv-test-suite/README.md:

from riscv-arch-test.

allenjbaum commented on August 16, 2024

The tests suite directories have been reorganized, so I'm closing this issue. Please reopen if you think this has not been done correctly. The current directory structure should match the test spec format now.

from riscv-arch-test.

Reorganization of test suites for code maintainability about riscv-arch-test HOT 5 CLOSED

Comments (5)

Related Issues (20)

Recommend Projects

React

Vue.js

Typescript

TensorFlow

Django

Laravel

D3

Recommend Topics

javascript

web

server

Machine learning

Visualization

Game

Recommend Org

Facebook

Microsoft

Google

Alibaba

D3

Tencent