From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 72B9E3858D34; Wed,  1 May 2024 10:29:20 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 72B9E3858D34
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1714559360;
	bh=RpC6eY5qM+GYeg8AAVGbQFeQFIxGjqPKoP9pxtou0UU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=XXtIfOc8UDzw8GW0Nw8f7RpVOXkqExbmqO2yBHijh1ILOP5aqKSxWxw5CpZ0yiRpn
	 +519W/jAaTrhdV8FOZmbpswkv9i7/F0gg/PVZDmQTMg68AirgNnX5D2PMLHKcSS4fS
	 pTm8Yhv4g1IXFzt62nJL2jsD3A0TjflPS2dqL41w=
From: "ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug analyzer/111475] [14/15 regression] Many C++ analyzer tests
 FAIL
Date: Wed, 01 May 2024 10:29:17 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: analyzer
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: testsuite-fail
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-111475-4-0Bcn3wKMCI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-111475-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-111475-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D111475

--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot =
Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
"dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> --- Comment #11 from David Malcolm <dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Thanks.  I've been working on this on cfarm216; I have a messy set of pat=
ches
> with this improvement to g++.sum with analyzer.exp so far:
>
> # of expected passes           11395 -> 12015
> # of unexpected failures         684 ->    64
> # of unexpected successes          4 ->     0
> # of expected failures           443 ->   447
> # of unsupported tests            50
>
> However I'm don't have access to my regular workstation/testing box until=
 late
> tomorrow, so I'm holding off on posting until I've cleaned them up and pu=
t them
> through my usual testing regime.

That's excellent news, thanks for the update.=