Re: [patch/rfc] Remove all setup_xfail's from testsuite/gdb.mi/

[Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>]

Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> 
> I agree with Fernando that it's okay to tie every XFAIL to a gdb PR
> and turn it into a KFAIL (at least, I think he is saying that).
> 

Right.

> Let's take a specific case.  gdb.base/constvars.exp has a lot of
> tests such as "const char * foo ; ptype foo".  With gcc 2.95.3/stabs+,
> the "ptype" prints "char * foo".  This happens because gcc 2.95.3/stabs+
> does not put any const information in the stabs.  This is probably never
> going to get fixed in the gcc 2 series.
> 

That is a true XFAIL, but it should be conditional to version 2 compilers and 
stabs, so that it does not show as XPASS everywhere else.


> Now the real problem comes to light.  'K' and 'X' are really orthogonal.
> 'K' means that we know about the problem, and 'X' means that it is
> a problem in an external tool, and these two things are separate.
> But we made them an either/or, so we have to choose.
> 
> I'd rather have this become a KFAIL with reference to a gdb PR.  Then
> the gdb PR can say that this incorrect behavior happens, but it's not
> gdb's fault.  The gdb PR should refer to a gcc PR or other external PR.
> And then we can't close the gdb PR until gcc revives gcc 2.X development
> or gdb drop supports for gcc 2.X.
> 
> We could add another PR state for these kind of PR's, or we could
> just use the 'suspended' state.
> 

The Dejagnu community will kill me if I come out with yet another type of 
failure ;-)  The problem is that the international standard don't even recognize 
these extensions we've added (XFAIL and KFAIL), although I think they are really 
important and your weekely reports prove that.

>>From the gdb user's point of view, a bug is a bug.  A gdb user can do
> the same thing as the test suite and then file a PR: 'gdb fails to
> print 'const' for const types'.
> 

Yes, but we have little control over what we call XFAIL cases.  But you have a 
good point that they deserve some user documentation as much as the KFAILs do.

Please see my reply to Daniel's message.



-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto                       E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9