From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id gyLWMd3xXmKoPAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:31:09 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id B8A811F377; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.b="R4t08IEu"; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C01B81EDF0 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:31:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B373857366 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:31:04 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 08B373857366 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1650389464; bh=d4BZOrCyUd8Hz3S4Ye9i7r/0EwH6jiN+7zgs93+z6N4=; h=Date:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=R4t08IEuF7GMBkd9eTXME9rty3fwcsZH2VXYcGlt5sZMqGFfh9RFQFVK0kyD8xJp4 +X/8tPd8vLA7MKkyNxQ7/1QeKm1bPEJ+ZOC0h1RQE7o6zYFfepwJFKioXZFT3qsgwE sg67eXNVFrtu9Xb5dvacihAE8U5aL4eIuDpfpMXU= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E935D3858C83 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:30:44 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org E935D3858C83 Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-295-PdD3je3_OeawbcurMIKQAQ-1; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 13:30:39 -0400 X-MC-Unique: PdD3je3_OeawbcurMIKQAQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E6DA29DD9A5; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:30:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from f35-zws-1 (unknown [10.2.16.26]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7F2540CF8FA; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:30:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:30:27 -0700 To: Kevin Buettner via Gdb-patches Subject: Re: GDB/Fortran: Support for Assumed Rank Zero. Message-ID: <20220419103027.298d8ea5@f35-zws-1> In-Reply-To: <20220418083328.5fb70540@f35-zws-1> References: <20220413112753.4c6f1128@f35-zws-1> <20220414142845.281b878d@f35-zws-1> <20220415123112.697ff872@f35-zws-1> <20220418083328.5fb70540@f35-zws-1> Organization: Red Hat MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.11.54.1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Kevin Buettner via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Kevin Buettner Cc: "George, Jini Susan" , "Parasuraman, Hariharan" , "Sharma, Alok Kumar" , "Potharla, Rupesh" Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 08:33:28 -0700 Kevin Buettner via Gdb-patches wrote: > I'm also (still) wondering how to run the testsuite to use flang > instead of gfortran since it'd be nice to test to see if the setup_xfail > actually works. I spent just enough time looking at it last week > to convince myself that GDB's testing infrastructure currently lacks the > mechanisms to do this. However, I could be wrong, so if someone > knows how it's done, I'd like to learn about it... It seems that the answer is to run the test as follows: make check TESTS="gdb.fortran/assumedrank.exp" RUNTESTFLAGS="F90_FOR_TARGET=flang" (I thought that I had tried this last week.) When I run the above command on my Fedora 35 machine, I see: # of expected passes 500 # of unexpected failures 2503 # of unresolved testcases 500 So it seems that this test doesn't work very well with flang at the moment. That being the case, while I'm not against adding setup_xfail for clang, it doesn't seem all that useful due to the dismal results when testing against flang. Kevin