* xfail ld-undefined test for Xtensa
@ 2005-05-11 22:49 Bob Wilson
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Bob Wilson @ 2005-05-11 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: binutils
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 426 bytes --]
Xtensa targets fail the ld-undefined test because the line number in the error
message is wrong. I think this is due to the use of literal pools for Xtensa.
The test is already marked as an expected failure for s390 for the same reason,
so I've committed this patch to mark it as an expected failure for xtensa-*-*.
2005-05-11 Bob Wilson <bob.wilson@acm.org>
* ld-undefined/undefined.exp: xfail xtensa-*-*.
[-- Attachment #2: ld-undef-xfail.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 620 bytes --]
Index: ld-undefined/undefined.exp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/ld/testsuite/ld-undefined/undefined.exp,v
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -r1.22 undefined.exp
--- ld-undefined/undefined.exp 22 Mar 2005 14:20:38 -0000 1.22
+++ ld-undefined/undefined.exp 11 May 2005 20:49:40 -0000
@@ -128,5 +128,7 @@
# of 9. On 64 bit s/390 this works because of the new brasl instruction that
# doesn't need a literal pool entry.
setup_xfail s390-*-*
+# Xtensa also uses a literal pool and has the same problem as s/390.
+setup_xfail xtensa-*-*
checkund $ml $testline
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2005-05-11 20:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-05-11 22:49 xfail ld-undefined test for Xtensa Bob Wilson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).