On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 10:04:35PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 21:52 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On July 3, 2014 8:38:14 PM CEST, Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:37:07PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >> Well, simply removing the regression testing for LTO is a
> > >maintainance nightmare as well.
> > >>
> > >> The guality testsuite is very noisy anyway with all the xfail and
> > >xpass.
> > >
> > >Let's keep it as is then?
> >
> > That works for me.
>
> I don't find that very satisfactory. I want to add more guality tests,
> but the fact that they are unreliable and by default introduce even more
> FAILs when lto is enabled makes that not very attractive. I do like
> Jakub's suggestion to disable the guality tests be run with lto by
> default, but provide an environment variable to enable them for those
> that want to try them anyway. Shall I implement that?
They aren't that unrealiable (at least, if people committing patches don't
ignore regressions in there). Just one should diff contrib/test_summary
output from earlier builds to the latest, that way it is clear what is a
regression and what is not.
Jakub
