From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x632.google.com (mail-pl1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::632]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F274B3858D1E for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 00:00:51 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org F274B3858D1E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-pl1-x632.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1b52bf6e669so33155075ad.2 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2023 17:00:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1687219251; x=1689811251; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=9c2sL8PSSb68BNlA7FFaOfLajnQgBgWhpoTIHNGQEWc=; b=oLi/jiWsdq/aclnBfpSkc4XL3A57J1px3U3s2h7cTWW4GDhlMzngiWroho6xrqbZFk LTLYq+RW3G3k6SNkz6LR8hf1OUgpOd7BNVjX1AaEGTPaDbGwxefQ83sBH7QMs8rsh5Um JDTLS/uoHEiB5jPsAKCwOjmKTMSSH4I5q18eLXG9sp0jNukgj3qOgYbBB0IHDlrTSYMD fXkKYSVcKrYvlk9xxdZI8/f9/t5BPeCMSEBUrzLvpjhdk1PLH6Mw4XotfuQZtUIKOobD QuODqQQ8reW48HpU+JzGBZopBpxNVh/lPIBLdc2+63g2ISON9U1WqZQthISWRv8W/f4U L+7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1687219251; x=1689811251; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=9c2sL8PSSb68BNlA7FFaOfLajnQgBgWhpoTIHNGQEWc=; b=QVHkmT+MeVaR8m3+vqYSFCOCR/qPk5hqwbDiZIGqLt7lmb+4eFxi8+9LY6BIqqPzcF +QCnOOpPOi6eYR6ZmJETpqsQHGqx3ezJ88+9ugUG5VQbjHMksDq1hIobwbzNFFchbJJc JWfO/KjzPgHYniB1yCPG7sj1Eh154WlywigM+fUcHrFxr/KtmvKKxtwCTz85xYLFrWa+ EMKqQMCl0YZqULoujO2kR7Kc5zbongLXiEBUp+tuzE4J+YO9GuEx/C0p2B/qjI5eJn3c sZGtfFDjyakrtpO8edyf86l5KNTJEbMmA7kK5a0pXnOiBYpL39v9m+9uSXbOxL64DoqF unPQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzH8Wq+Ll1bDDXKWeKvWjJAsfM6X8i0OVPozNOjvxmuY9yEdOR1 7RlVEnRAwd6Q+ZwlaoPnxP4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6UxdbJypj1dqF7CnAxfTgmTDNfOsuLtH6t42llbEySEb1x5I8JED43cS8C81QzfsgUAigvBw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e801:b0:1b5:4262:ec7b with SMTP id u1-20020a170902e80100b001b54262ec7bmr9822454plg.27.1687219250749; Mon, 19 Jun 2023 17:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from squeak.grove.modra.org ([2406:3400:51d:8cc0:4d08:cebd:d73f:b794]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y20-20020a1709027c9400b001a9bcedd598sm363740pll.11.2023.06.19.17.00.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 19 Jun 2023 17:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by squeak.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B0B3A11412A9; Tue, 20 Jun 2023 09:30:47 +0930 (ACST) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 09:30:47 +0930 From: Alan Modra To: YunQiang Su Cc: YunQiang Su , binutils@sourceware.org, macro@orcam.me.uk, paul.hua.gm@gmail.com, jbeulich@suse.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] MIPS: Fix some ld testcases with compiler Message-ID: References: <20230616063412.1715024-1-yunqiang.su@cipunited.com> <20230616063412.1715024-6-yunqiang.su@cipunited.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3026.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 06:43:05PM +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: > Alan Modra via Binutils 于2023年6月19日周一 14:44写道： > > > > Hi YunQiang Su, > > I thought I'd take a detailed look at your patch modifying the generic > > ELF tests for mips, despite not really being familiar enough with mips > > to properly review mips changes. Most of this review is not about > > details of the patch but rather questioning whether you have done the > > necessary analysis before xfailing tests. It is reasonable to xfail a > > test if for some reason a problem cannot be fixed, or even if a > > problem is too difficult to be fixed. On the other hand we don't want > > a clean testsuite result if there are problems that should be fixed. > > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 02:34:10PM +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: > > > 1. config/default.exp: > > > use -mabi=32 not for -gnuabi64; > > > xfail_from_runlist: remove an element and mark it xfail. > > > > I dislike the use of xfail here. xfail should only be used after > > running a test, to record an expected fail. Don't use it when a test > > is not run. > > > > Maybe, kfail is better? Perhaps, but we don't use kfail in the binutils testsuite. > > > 2. ld-elf/indirect.exp: xfail > > > indirect5a, indirect5b, indirect6a, indirect6b, > > > indirect5c, indirect5d, indirect6c, indirect6d. > > > > Can you explain why is it correct to xfail these for mips? The first > > four pass for me on mips-linux. Is there a reason why the last four > > must make "bar" dynamic on mips? > > > > Do you have a cross compiler installed? Yes. I wouldn't be reporting passes if I didn't. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM