This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: patch/RFC/RFT detect ICE in libjava testsuite
- From: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>
- To: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
- Cc: Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 16:09:29 -0700
- Subject: Re: patch/RFC/RFT detect ICE in libjava testsuite
- References: <20060512231635.GA7197@us.ibm.com> <44690068.7040500@avtrex.com>
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 03:27:52PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
> I tried the patch, and it does indeed seem to produce FAILs when the
> compiler ICEs and the xfail file contains 'shouldfail'. However I have
> been unsuccessful supressing the FAIL messages.
I consider it a feature of this patch that you can't suppress a FAIL for
an ICE. If a test exposes an internal compiler error then it should
keep being reported as FAIL until someone is annoyed enought to fix it.
This is especially true since Tom Tromey asked that the FAIL messages
have the same contents as other FAIL messages and not include "internal
compiler error". The practical part of this is that an internal
compiler error in a test that is already XFAILed is likely to go
unnoticed.
> The best I could do was to place 'xfail-gcj' and 'xfail-gcjC' in the
> xfail file. That reduced my FAILs from six to two on the test case.
>
> PRx0418.xfail contains:
> ----------
> xfail-gcj
> xfail-gcjC
> ----------
>
> The xfails seem to come when we are using libtool to compile. I am not
> sure how to suppress those.
That was a bug in my patch for one call to bytecompile_file. I'm testing
a new one that ignores those xfails when there's an ICE.
Janis