This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug middle-end/52823] [4.8 Regression] FAIL: gnat.dg/renaming5.adb scan-tree-dump-times optimized "goto" 2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52823

Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-01 23:00:07 UTC ---
> AFAICT the test passes at r185912 on s390-ibm-linux-gnu default (see
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg03204.html), but fails at
> r185969 (see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg03354.html) as
> well as on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (see
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg03405.html).

It probably fails everywhere, this is known, no point in opening a PR for such
a benign regression during stage #1.

> Note that gnat.dg/return3.adb fails on s390-ibm-linux-gnu default and
> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu:
> 
> FAIL: gnat.dg/return3.adb scan-assembler loc 1 6
> 
> I did not checked if a pr has already been filled for it or not. If not, since
> I don't see it on darwin, I'll let a linux user fill it.

Likewise, let's avoid cluttering up the database for this.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]