[Bug ada/52219] [4.7 Regression] FAIL: cxg2001

[iains at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52219

--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-19 15:37:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> cxg2001 has passed my last tests without failure.

likewise on all my recent tests on both patched & un-patched trees.

I find that the acats tests are quite likely to exhibit random fails on D9 and
D10 for parallel tests on loaded machines, but I associate that with the
test-environment (repeating make check-ada has always come up clean - except
for cases with real bugs).  Which is different from the libjava/boehm-gc cases
which always exhibit the marginal fails even on a single process test cycle.

====

... the test looks like it is doing some FP work - so not likely to be subject
to the two following phenomena:

> Is it in the same class as Thread_Sleep_2 in libjava

this randomly fails for a known reason (OS bug), we should probably ask for the
Java to be changed so that the timeout has a suitable capture range (it doesn't
look like the bug will be fixed in D9 or D10).

 or thread_leak_test.c in
> boehm-gc for which I got ~6 failures out of ~90 regtests?

this (I think) is related to operating close to the limit of available stack
(but that's unconfirmed and on the TODO to investigate).

=====

.. although, it's not impossible that either effect could manifest in
cxg2001.a, it seems unlikely.  I'd be more inclined to blame expect/tcl/dejgnu
+ system load.  Unless you can repeat the failure.