From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4578 invoked by alias); 27 Aug 2012 15:15:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 4426 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Aug 2012 15:15:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 15:14:47 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1T611Z-0005e5-Eu from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 08:14:45 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-04.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.41]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 08:14:45 -0700 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-04.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 08:14:44 -0700 Message-ID: <503B8EE3.6040906@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 15:15:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: Pedro Alves , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Remove pass in skip_unwinder_tests References: <877gt1zbr5.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <1345715389-20955-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1345715389-20955-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <20120824133738.GB5219@host2.jankratochvil.net> <5037A087.1090703@redhat.com> <20120824161854.GA10953@host2.jankratochvil.net> <503B4CF7.5090509@codesourcery.com> <20120827130641.GA5592@host2.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20120827130641.GA5592@host2.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-08/txt/msg00800.txt.bz2 On 08/27/2012 09:06 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: >> If we do a gdb test, and test is failed because of the misbehaviour, >> >we should use XFAIL. > What is "misbehavior" here? > I meant "system misbehaviour". > >> >However, in proc 'skip_XXX' in lib/gdb.exp, we >> >check the supported feature of system instead of doing a gdb test, >> >so no PASS/FAIL/XFAIL should be emitted. > XFAIL is for "unsupported system feature". > > What does XFAIL mean different than "unsupported system feature"? > IMO, XFAIL means "unsupported system feature" or "system misbehaviour" in my previous reply, but ... > When will ever be XFAIL emitted if not for "unsupported system feature"? ... it doesn't mean we should use XFAIL for *every* "unsupported system feature", IMO. XFAIL can be used for "unsupported system feature" in gdb test, but XFAIL (nor PASS) can not be used in checking the feature of system, because checking itself is not a test. I'd like to call them (proc skip_XXX and proc support_XXX in lib/gdb.exp) 'test configuration checking' which determines the set of tests to run according to the configuration of GDB and other factors. They should not contribute PASS/XFAIL/FAIL/... to test result, because they are not tests. -- Yao