This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Request for testsuite regression period
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 10:42:29 -0700
- Subject: Re: Request for testsuite regression period
- References: <200603061734.k26HYgbX016672@earth.phy.uc.edu>
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 12:34 -0500, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> I noticed that some testsuite regressions were not getting fixed.
> There are 3 failures in the gcc.dg/tree-ssa (PR 26344).
> And 5 in g++.dg (PR 26115 and PR 26114).
> All of these testsuite regressions have been there for almost
> three weeks (the C++ have been there over a month now). The
> patch which caused them has been identified over 48 hours ago.
> What is the policy for testsuite regressions that have been
> there for over 48 hours and effect all targets and have not
> been fixed yet?
> Should we cause the mainline to go into stage3 until these
> regressions have been fixed?
> Since the testsuite helps people know "instantaneous" if they
> patch is wrong, having known FAILs stay too long just causes confusion.
If you're that bothered by the failures, then xfail them
until I can fix them.
Revering the patch would be a giant PITA and would actually
make it *HARDER* to fix the Ada problems.
You're really not helping here. I'm dealing with things as
quickly as I can and prioritizing the incorrect code issues
over minor performance issues.