XFAILing gcc.c-torture/execute/mayalias-2.c -O3 -g (PR 28834)

Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
Thu Mar 15 06:12:00 GMT 2007

Janis Johnson wrote:

>> It's not punishing the testcase; it's recognising that we have a bug 
>> tracking system to track regressions and having "expected unexpected 
>> FAILs" is helpful neither to users wishing to know if their compiler built 
>> as expected nor to developers glancing over test results to see if they 
>> seem OK.
> I've come to agree with that point of view and I'll look into allowing
> XFAIL for tests that ICE.  Torture tests are handled differently,
> though, and this particular test can be XFAILed with the example .x
> file I sent earlier.

/me three

The testsuite, especially on release branches, is not to highlight
regressions, prod developers into fixing things, etc.  It's to let
developers and users who build from source figure out whether their
builds are behaving as we expect them to behave.  Zero FAILs may not be
achievable on all targets, but if I had a magic XFAIL wand, that would
put the right XFAIL goo into all tests before every release so that all
users who built the toolchain correctly always got zero FAILs, I would
do it.

Mark Mitchell
(650) 331-3385 x713

More information about the Gcc mailing list