This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: SOme bugfixes in expr.c
- To: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu
- Subject: Re: SOme bugfixes in expr.c
- From: <guerby at acm dot org>
- Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 12:16:48 +0100
- CC: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <10110272151.AA24724@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
- Reply-to: guerby at acm dot org
This indeed fixes 9 ACATS expr.c ICEs:
<<
gcc -c -I/home/guerby/work/gcc/acats/acats4gnat-0.3/work/support c37213d.adb
+===========================GNAT BUG DETECTED==============================+
| 5.00w (20010924) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) GCC error: |
| Internal compiler error in find_placeholder, at expr.c:6086 |
=> 9 times
>>
But it probably added a few failures to the C testsuite. Yesterday the FAIL count
was at 1, today it's 19. However I can't say for sure this was caused by your patch,
since there were other commited in the meantime.
<<
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20000224-1.c, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20000224-1.c, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20000224-1.c, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20000224-1.c, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20000224-1.c, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20000224-1.c, -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20000224-1.c, -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20000412-5.c compilation, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20000412-5.c compilation, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20000412-5.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20000412-5.c compilation, -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20000412-5.c compilation, -Os
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010114-1.c compilation, -O1
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010114-1.c compilation, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010114-1.c compilation, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010114-1.c compilation, -O3 -g
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010114-1.c compilation, -Os
FAIL: gcc.dg/format/ext-2.c bad use of I flag (test for warnings, line 72)
FAIL: gcc.dg/format/ext-2.c (test for excess errors)
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 16083
# of unexpected failures 19
# of expected failures 71
# of unresolved testcases 10
# of unsupported tests 24
/home/guerby/work/gcc/build-alt2/gcc/xgcc version 3.1 20011028 (experimental)
>>
Is there any policy about the status of the C testsuite on a major
platform like i686-pc-linux-gnu versus commits? Since the wall clock
time needed is 24 minutes on a 1GHz P3 (vs 45 minutes for bootstrap),
this doesn't seem unreasonable to require the testsuite to stay in
good shape, or at least that new FAIL are announced by people
commiting patches?
--
Laurent Guerby <guerby@acm.org>