What do you suggest, a bug report per failure with nothing but the
directory/name of the test?
I'd say a bug report for each distinct failure. It can get awful
confusing when there's multiple bugs in a single PR...
Done. PR numbers below.
There is no trans-mem or libitm component, so I had
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/03/11 17:40, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On 11/03/11 18:30, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Aldy Hernandez
>> wrote:
>>> These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations.
>>> XFAILing them.
>>
>> I think you should file
On 11/03/11 18:30, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations. XFAILing them.
I think you should file a bug about each missed optimization and
reference the bug # in the testcase. This is so we don't lose
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations. Â XFAILing them.
I think you should file a bug about each missed optimization and
reference the bug # in the testcase. This is so we don't lose track
of the missed optimizations.
Thanks
These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations. XFAILing them.
Committed to branch.
libitm/
* testsuite/libitm.c/reentrant.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C: XFAIL.
gcc/
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-3.c: XFAIL.
* testsuite/gcc.dg/tm/memopt-4.c:
