This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [testsuite] checks for decimal float support
- From: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>
- To: Ben Elliston <bje at au1 dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:53:48 -0800
- Subject: Re: [testsuite] checks for decimal float support
- References: <20060116235004.GA7721@us.ibm.com> <20060130030132.GA15333@ozlabs.au.ibm.com>
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 02:01:32PM +1100, Ben Elliston wrote:
> Hi Janis
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 03:50:04PM -0800, Janis Johnson wrote:
>
> > This patch adds a separate effective-target keyword, dfprt, for
> > existence of decimal float runtime support. It uses that to
> > determine whether to run specific tests, and whether the default
> > action for the gcc.dg/dfp tests is "run" or "compile". Compat tests
> > for decimal float now check for runtime support using a non-cached
> > version of the new proc.
>
> The only problem I have encountered with this change is that when the
> small test program fails to execute (say, due to a regression), we
> don't see failures -- we just get fewer expected passes. This is a
> bit undesirable. Could the execution tests be marked as UNTESTED or
> XFAIL, rather than just silently skipping them?
They shouldn't be XFAIL. I'll think about how to mark them as UNTESTED,
which doesn't fit into the current scheme. If you file a PR I'll be
more likely to remember to do it; you have permission to assign it to me.
Janis