Re: GCC 4.8.0 Status Report (2012-10-29), Stage 1 to end soon

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>]

On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 12:52:04AM -0700, Sharad Singhai wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Sharad Singhai <singhai@google.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jakub,
> >
> > My -fopt-info pass filtering patch
> > (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg02704.html) is being
> > reviewed and I hope to get this in by Nov. 5 for inclusion in gcc
> > 4.8.0.
> 
> I just committed -fopt-info pass filtering patch as r193061.

How was that change tested?  I'm seeing thousands of new UNRESOLVED
failures, of the form:
spawn -ignore SIGHUP /usr/src/gcc/obj415/gcc/xgcc -B/usr/src/gcc/obj415/gcc/ /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/branch-cost1.c -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -O2 -fdump-tree-gimple -mbranch-cost=0 -S -o branch-cost1.s
PASS: gcc.target/i386/branch-cost1.c (test for excess errors)
gcc.target/i386/branch-cost1.c: dump file does not exist
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i386/branch-cost1.c scan-tree-dump-times gimple "if " 2
gcc.target/i386/branch-cost1.c: dump file does not exist
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i386/branch-cost1.c scan-tree-dump-not gimple " & "

See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-11/msg00033.html
or http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-11/msg00034.html, compare that
to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-11/msg00025.html
or http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-11/msg00026.html

The difference is just your patch and unrelated sh backend change.

	Jakub