From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 860 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2004 23:54:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 842 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2004 23:54:47 -0000 Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20041025235447.841.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "wilson at tuliptree dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20041015111408.18010.davidm@hpl.hp.com> References: <20041015111408.18010.davidm@hpl.hp.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/18010] bad unwind info due to multiple returns (missing epilogue) X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg03134.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From wilson at tuliptree dot org 2004-10-25 23:54 ------- Subject: Re: bad unwind info due to multiple returns (missing epilogue) On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 03:57, davidm at hpl dot hp dot com wrote: > It looks to > me as if "expect" sometimes fails to notice the (failure-free) termination of > the compiler and that leads to subsequent and spurious test-suite failures. > I'll see if this is a bug in "expect". Yes, there are some known problems with some versions of expect, particularly on 64-bit machines. I haven't seen any such problems on my IA-64 debian linux machine though, at least, not that I have noticed. Most of the testsuite problems I have had have been load related. If the load average changes while running the testsuite, this can cause tests which are close to the timeout to be over/under depending on the load. Also, some java tests are self-timing, and can fail if the load changes unexpected while they are running. I think it was HJ that wrote the patch to fix the expect problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18010