[NFC][CFI] Avoid clang error in CFI tests

[vitalybuka]

In these tests we test correct linking flags set,
and it's confusing that command fails because of
other missing required flags.

Clang diagnostics opportunistically proceed after
error report on required flags, but there is no
guaranty that processing of tested flags are the same
in supported and erroneous flag sets.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-driver

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

Author: Vitaly Buka (vitalybuka)

Changes

In these tests we test correct linking flags set,
and it' confusing that command fails because of
other missing required flags.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/135981.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) clang/test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c (+12-6)

diff --git a/clang/test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c b/clang/test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c
index 67ca33d676d20..a00ec029d3d46 100644
--- a/clang/test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c
+++ b/clang/test/Driver/sanitizer-ld.c
@@ -840,7 +840,8 @@
 // CHECK-CFI-PREREQ-LINUX: '-fsanitize=cfi' only allowed with '-fvisibility='
 
 // CFI by itself does not link runtime libraries.
-// RUN: not %clang -fsanitize=cfi \
+// RUN: %clang -fsanitize=cfi \
+// RUN:     -flto -fvisibility=hidden \
 // RUN:     --target=x86_64-unknown-linux -fuse-ld=ld -rtlib=platform \
 // RUN:     -resource-dir=%S/Inputs/resource_dir \
 // RUN:     --sysroot=%S/Inputs/basic_linux_tree \
@@ -849,7 +850,8 @@
 // CHECK-CFI-LINUX: "{{.*}}ld{{(.exe)?}}"
 
 // CFI with diagnostics links the UBSan runtime.
-// RUN: not %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fno-sanitize-trap=cfi -fsanitize-recover=cfi \
+// RUN: %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fno-sanitize-trap=cfi -fsanitize-recover=cfi \
+// RUN:     -flto -fvisibility=hidden \
 // RUN:     --target=x86_64-unknown-linux -fuse-ld=ld \
 // RUN:     -resource-dir=%S/Inputs/resource_dir \
 // RUN:     --sysroot=%S/Inputs/basic_linux_tree \
@@ -859,7 +861,8 @@
 // CHECK-CFI-DIAG-LINUX: "--whole-archive" "{{[^"]*}}libclang_rt.ubsan_standalone.a" "--no-whole-archive"
 
 // Cross-DSO CFI links the CFI runtime.
-// RUN: not %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN: %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN:     -flto -fvisibility=hidden \
 // RUN:     --target=x86_64-unknown-linux -fuse-ld=ld \
 // RUN:     -resource-dir=%S/Inputs/resource_dir \
 // RUN:     --sysroot=%S/Inputs/basic_linux_tree \
@@ -870,7 +873,8 @@
 // CHECK-CFI-CROSS-DSO-LINUX: -export-dynamic
 
 // Cross-DSO CFI with diagnostics links just the CFI runtime.
-// RUN: not %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN: %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN:     -flto -fvisibility=hidden \
 // RUN:     -fno-sanitize-trap=cfi -fsanitize-recover=cfi \
 // RUN:     --target=x86_64-unknown-linux -fuse-ld=ld \
 // RUN:     -resource-dir=%S/Inputs/resource_dir \
@@ -882,7 +886,8 @@
 // CHECK-CFI-CROSS-DSO-DIAG-LINUX: -export-dynamic
 
 // Cross-DSO CFI on Android does not link runtime libraries.
-// RUN: not %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN: %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN:     -flto -fvisibility=hidden \
 // RUN:     --target=aarch64-linux-android -fuse-ld=ld \
 // RUN:     -resource-dir=%S/Inputs/resource_dir \
 // RUN:     --sysroot=%S/Inputs/basic_android_tree \
@@ -891,7 +896,8 @@
 // CHECK-CFI-CROSS-DSO-ANDROID: "{{.*}}ld{{(.exe)?}}"
 
 // Cross-DSO CFI with diagnostics on Android links just the UBSAN runtime.
-// RUN: not %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN: %clang -fsanitize=cfi -fsanitize-cfi-cross-dso \
+// RUN:     -flto -fvisibility=hidden \
 // RUN:     -fno-sanitize-trap=cfi -fsanitize-recover=cfi \
 // RUN:     --target=aarch64-linux-android -fuse-ld=ld \
 // RUN:     -resource-dir=%S/Inputs/resource_dir \

[mysterymath]

This is causing a test failure in our clang CI bots: https://luci-milo.appspot.com/ui/p/fuchsia/builders/toolchain.ci/clang-host-linux-x64/b8717414717471782065/overview

It doesn't seem that any error output is produced for the test though; do you have an intuition for what's happening? This is the only change in the blamelist, so it's definitely a result of this PR.

[vitalybuka]

This is causing a test failure in our clang CI bots: https://luci-milo.appspot.com/ui/p/fuchsia/builders/toolchain.ci/clang-host-linux-x64/b8717414717471782065/overview

It doesn't seem that any error output is produced for the test though; do you have an intuition for what's happening? This is the only change in the blamelist, so it's definitely a result of this PR.

#136002 to get output

if it gives no clue, I'll revert both