This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Libjava test failure Was: [PATCH] microblaze: microblaze.md: Use 'SI' instead of 'VOID' for operand 1 of 'call_value_intern'
- From: Chen Gang <gang dot chen dot 5i5j at gmail dot com>
- To: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Cc: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, Michael Eager <eager at eagerm dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, davem at redhat dot com, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 07:18:14 +0800
- Subject: Re: Libjava test failure Was: [PATCH] microblaze: microblaze.md: Use 'SI' instead of 'VOID' for operand 1 of 'call_value_intern'
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <bekwguasixaphab5pghrhbxp dot 1411603920412 at email dot android dot com> <5430B7E8 dot 1060001 at gmail dot com> <5430BBBE dot 8050905 at gmail dot com> <543215AE dot 7080206 at gmail dot com> <543254DB dot 9020600 at redhat dot com> <54329EEC dot 8040609 at gmail dot com> <54329F17 dot 7050107 at redhat dot com> <5432A6C5 dot 8040205 at gmail dot com> <5432A712 dot 2080206 at redhat dot com> <5432AE7A dot 2060206 at gmail dot com> <5432AE68 dot 4030700 at redhat dot com> <5432B6F6 dot 4050504 at gmail dot com> <855EEF7C-973D-4675-BE11-FBEF9CA64C69 at comcast dot net>
On 10/7/14 1:29, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Oct 6, 2014, at 8:36 AM, Chen Gang <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> For me, "make -k check" is suitable for one sub-system (e.g. for cross
>> building, and mainly focus on gcc), but not for global check (full
>> non-cross building check):
> In our world, there is no sub-system, so, talk of such is outside the scope of gcc.
> Let me repeat what he said differently.
> You have two choices, fixing the port so that there are no unexpected failures or running check with -k.
> I’d like to get to the point where all primary/secondary platforms can use make check directly, we’re not there yet.
> The idea is that the single return value tells if if the suite passed or not. This is an absolute measure, that, when achieved means one never has to compare previous/present results, just know that the suite passed. Sometimes simple is better.
>> - "make check" is the standard check for global,
> No sub-system, no global.
Theoretically, in each system (include gcc), always can be separated
into several 'sub-systems', and then 'global' means the system itself.
In our case, we say let 'global' pass checking means let gcc, gfortran,
g++, libjava ... all pass checking. But for mainly focus on constructing
environments, I will try to use upstream glibc instead of Darwin glibc:
- If fix Throw_2, we know it is environments construction issue.
- Else, I shall skip it (since "make -k check" should be OK).
And after finish testsuite under Darwin, within this month, I shall try
to find and send a patch for gcc, and pass testsuite under Darwin (it
seems it is not quite difficult to me).
Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed