From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14945 invoked by alias); 19 May 2011 13:42:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 14934 invoked by uid 22791); 19 May 2011 13:42:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 May 2011 13:42:33 +0000 Received: (qmail 3072 invoked from network); 19 May 2011 13:42:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.102?) (yao@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 19 May 2011 13:42:32 -0000 Message-ID: <4DD51E40.6080401@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 13:42:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Joseph S. Myers" CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [_Complex test 2/4] _Complex type in varargs.exp References: <4DC401D0.1050500@codesourcery.com> <4DC75036.4040806@codesourcery.com> <4DD49DA6.6040407@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00439.txt.bz2 On 05/19/2011 06:13 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Thu, 19 May 2011, Yao Qi wrote: > >> This patch is to add _Complex type in vararg testing. >> >> Run varargs.exp on i686-pc-linux-gnu, get new two KFAIL. Note that PR >> 12776 is opened to track this problem. > > I think such KFAILs need to be target specific, so only for 32-bit x86 in > this case, since for each target architecture where such a test fails it's > going to be a separate bug in that target's ABI implementation in GDB and > should have a separate PR. Tests in this case also fail on armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Shall I have to file yet another two PRs for armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu respectively, and KFAIL them to different PR separately? At least, I didn't see such usage elsewhere in gdb testsuite. IMO, KFAIL with target triplet works for the situation that one test passes on all ports except one or two. However, our test fails on most ports, different from KFAIL's typical usage. -- Yao (齐尧)