On 08/19/2015 06:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
[copying gdb folks]
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 08/18/2015 07:20 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
[snip]
The patch below has passed bootstrap & regtest on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
as well as gdb testing. Twice unpatched, twice patched - results seem
to be somewhat unstable!? I even refrained from using any -j with
make check-gdb... maybe it's just contrib/test_summary not coping well
with gdb? any hints? Difference between unpatched run 1 & 2 is
for example
--- results.unpatched 2015-08-19 15:08:36.152899926 +0200
+++ results.unpatched2 2015-08-19 15:29:46.902060797 +0200
@@ -209,7 +209,6 @@
WARNING: remote_expect statement without a default case?!
WARNING: remote_expect statement without a default case?!
WARNING: remote_expect statement without a default case?!
-FAIL: gdb.base/varargs.exp: print find_max_float_real(4, fc1, fc2, fc3,
fc4)
FAIL: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vD
FAIL: gdb.cp/inherit.exp: print g_vE
FAIL: gdb.cp/no-dmgl-verbose.exp: setting breakpoint at 'f(std::string)'
@@ -238,6 +237,7 @@
UNRESOLVED: gdb.fortran/types.exp: set print sevenbit-strings
FAIL: gdb.fortran/whatis_type.exp: run to MAIN__
WARNING: remote_expect statement without a default case?!
+FAIL: gdb.gdb/complaints.exp: print symfile_complaints->root->fmt
WARNING: remote_expect statement without a default case?!
WARNING: remote_expect statement without a default case?!
WARNING: remote_expect statement without a default case?!
@@ -362,12 +362,12 @@
=== gdb Summary ===
-# of expected passes 30881
+# of expected passes 30884
# of unexpected failures 284
# of unexpected successes 2
-# of expected failures 85
+# of expected failures 83
# of unknown successes 2
-# of known failures 60
+# of known failures 59
# of unresolved testcases 6
# of untested testcases 32
# of unsupported tests 165
the sames changes randomly appear/disappear in the patched case.
Otherwise patched/unpatched agree.
This is somewhat expected. Well, at least I never found a good
explanation. Some tests seemed to be thread related and inconsistent.
Others, I have no idea.
After running the tests enough times I got a feeling of which tests
would always pass, and use those as reference. It was confusing at
first. Perhaps the GDB folks could shed some light? I've found them very
helpful.
Also, -j made things worse. I never used it.
Aldy
