This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Libjava test failure Was: [PATCH] microblaze: microblaze.md: Use 'SI' instead of 'VOID' for operand 1 of 'call_value_intern'
- From: Chen Gang <gang dot chen dot 5i5j at gmail dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Cc: Michael Eager <eager at eagerm dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, davem at redhat dot com, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 23:36:22 +0800
- Subject: Re: Libjava test failure Was: [PATCH] microblaze: microblaze.md: Use 'SI' instead of 'VOID' for operand 1 of 'call_value_intern'
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <bekwguasixaphab5pghrhbxp dot 1411603920412 at email dot android dot com> <5430B7E8 dot 1060001 at gmail dot com> <5430BBBE dot 8050905 at gmail dot com> <543215AE dot 7080206 at gmail dot com> <543254DB dot 9020600 at redhat dot com> <54329EEC dot 8040609 at gmail dot com> <54329F17 dot 7050107 at redhat dot com> <5432A6C5 dot 8040205 at gmail dot com> <5432A712 dot 2080206 at redhat dot com> <5432AE7A dot 2060206 at gmail dot com> <5432AE68 dot 4030700 at redhat dot com>
On 10/6/14 22:59, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 10/06/2014 04:00 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>> On 10/6/14 22:28, Andrew Haley wrote:
[...]
>>> The testsuite isn't breaking: it's telling you something useful.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry it is breaked, at present, I temporarily skipped it and then can
>> let "make check" finish, the related temporarily skip diff may like
>> below (in real action, I modify the related Makefile, directly):
>
> You're missing what I'm saying. The testuite is not broken.
>
> You should be running "make -k check".
>
For me, "make -k check" is suitable for one sub-system (e.g. for cross
building, and mainly focus on gcc), but not for global check (full
non-cross building check):
- "make check" is the standard check for global, so when find new
issues (include environment construction), need stop in time.
- If one sub-system wants to skip the known issue, it can mark it as
'unexpected', or just simply return 0 to Makefile to let checking
continue (I guess, most of other sub-system do in this way).
- Or for other members (especially for newbies, e.g. me), he/she can
not sure whether the environment construction for testsuite is OK or
not:
e.g. For our case, after build upstream glibc and let testsuite use
it instead of Darwin glibc, all things may go OK. If really it is,
it is environments construction (not testsuite or code) issue.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed