Bug 83378 - [8 regression] gcc.dg/guality/pr54970.c xpass
Summary: [8 regression] gcc.dg/guality/pr54970.c xpass
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: gcc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: debug (show other bugs)
Version: 8.0
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: 8.0
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2017-12-11 17:06 UTC by Andrey Guskov
Modified: 2017-12-22 16:56 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target: x86_64-*-*
Build:
Known to work:
Known to fail:
Last reconfirmed:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andrey Guskov 2017-12-11 17:06:53 UTC
r255510 triggers this:

spawn gdb -nx -nw -quiet -batch -x pr54970.gdb ./pr54970.exe
XPASS: gcc.dg/guality/pr54970.c   -O0  line 31 a[0] == 4

Option set:
-with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld --with-fpmath=sse --enable-shared --enable-host-shared --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-cloog-backend=isl --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,jit,lto -with-arch=haswell --with-cpu=haswell
Comment 1 Richard Biener 2017-12-12 09:25:45 UTC
Was done intentionally.
Comment 2 Andrey Guskov 2017-12-19 15:59:36 UTC
Wait, isn`t XPASS an unexpected (i.e. erroneous) pass?
I know that XFAIL = expected fail, so I don`t consider it a fail. But what about XPASS?
Comment 3 Martin Jambor 2017-12-22 16:56:58 UTC
Not necessarily errorneous.

In this particular case, we simply lack the ability to tell deja-gnu to expect this to pass at -O0 but expect it to fail at any higher level.  We have consciously decided to cope with XPASSes (as opposed to coping with FAILs or duplicating the testcase).