jsji added a comment. In D113049#3140165 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D113049#3140165>, @Jake-Egan wrote:
> In D113049#3140160 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D113049#3140160>, @jsji wrote: > >> Can we use `UNSUPPORTED` instead of `XFAIL` since it is unsupported? > > If 64-bit XCOFF object files will be supported in the future, I think it > makes more sense to use `XFAIL` because these tests will still be run and > pass after implementation. We should remove the `UNSUPPORTED` when we enable the 64-bit XCOFF object file support . It is a waste of machine time to run them *NOW*, especially considering the number of these failing tests. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D113049/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D113049 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
