This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: A couple of testcases from GNATS
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Subject: Re: A couple of testcases from GNATS
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:53:51 +0100 (BST)
Geoff Keating wrote:
> I already mentioned that you should use exit(0) rather than return 0.
Checking shows that exit(0) is dominant in gcc.c-torture/execute but
return 0 is dominant in gcc.dg. Any particular reason why?
> Looking at your testcases more closely, I notice that they don't seem
> to guarantee failure. It seems quite likely that on one or more
> targets they will pass by accident. In that case, could you mention
> in the .x file which hosts are known to fail? Otherwise, I'll see
> that these are XPASS on some host, and all I can do is delete the .x
> file, because I don't know on which hosts they fail.
This patch adjusts 20000801-4.x only to xfail on x86 based on observation
from gcc-testresults. 20000801-3 seems to be failing everywhere. OK to
commit?
2000-08-05 Joseph S. Myers <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
* gcc.c-torture/execute/20000801-4.x: Only xfail on x86.
--- 20000801-4.x.orig Sat Aug 5 21:43:28 2000
+++ 20000801-4.x Sat Aug 5 21:43:56 2000
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
-set torture_execute_xfail "*-*-*"
+set torture_execute_xfail "i?86-*-*"
return 0
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk