From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from aserp2130.oracle.com (aserp2130.oracle.com [141.146.126.79]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55DF93857C6F for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:00:03 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 55DF93857C6F Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 12VGtnJW008003; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:00:01 GMT Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by aserp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 37mafv2ye1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:00:01 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 12VGpe4c073786; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:00:01 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 37mabpn8bf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:00:01 +0000 Received: from abhmp0018.oracle.com (abhmp0018.oracle.com [141.146.116.24]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 12VGxsBX020583; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 16:59:55 GMT Received: from dhcp-10-154-156-148.vpn.oracle.com (/10.154.156.148) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 09:59:54 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Disable zero-scratch-regs-{8, 9, 10, 11}.c on s390* [PR97680] From: Qing Zhao In-Reply-To: <12736839.uLZWGnKmhe@fomalhaut> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 11:59:53 -0500 Cc: Jakub Jelinek , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <079F4CC1-329B-42B6-9C81-3145B7C7682D@oracle.com> References: <20210330104358.GH1179226@tucnak> <5697441.lOV4Wx5bFT@fomalhaut> <20210331070236.GO1179226@tucnak> <12736839.uLZWGnKmhe@fomalhaut> To: Eric Botcazou , Jakub Jelinek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=9940 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2103300000 definitions=main-2103310115 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: sQWZ0wcoyt1jJ2hWMEZMgzVm3sRDFdW- X-Proofpoint-GUID: sQWZ0wcoyt1jJ2hWMEZMgzVm3sRDFdW- X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=9940 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 clxscore=1011 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2103300000 definitions=main-2103310115 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 17:00:04 -0000 Yes, basically, I agreed with Eric.=20 One of the major reason to intentionally put these testing cases under = c-c++-common is to fail them by default on the platforms that do not support this = feature yet.=20 Then the platform maintainer could decide whether to complete this = feature on the=20 specific platform or skip them if they don=E2=80=99t want such feature = on this platform.=20 Qing > On Mar 31, 2021, at 2:14 AM, Eric Botcazou = wrote: >=20 >> That is true, but nothing really happened during the 5 months that = the tests >> have been failing on many other architectures (except that powerpc = and arm >> had skipped those tests). There has been a PR open for all those 5 = months. >=20 > So what? This is not the first example and I don't see anything = special with=20 > it. You or maintainers can decide to XFAIL particular architectures = at will,=20 > but hiding the failures by default is IMO not appropriate. >=20 >> We can perhaps revert the skips after branching GCC 11 off, but I = have >> little hope other target maintainers will do what you did, so unsure = if it >> would help. And the changes need people familiar with each of the = backends >> to decide what needs to be done and what is doable. >=20 > That's exactly the same situation as for -fstack-usage/-Wstack-usage, = where I=20 > intentionally made gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c fail by default so that = maintainers=20 > could add the missing bits; this worked relatively well. >=20 > --=20 > Eric Botcazou >=20 >=20