From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA5FA387688F for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 15:57:31 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org EA5FA387688F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1666799851; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=FbtesEIQtGpjTb7OjMSJOp9rZmAQSRxNBv/rzA2OO1I=; b=hCM5atRS4g+hV26ZXXcO0hwz2Lb2kDL0ONo5PxWGY26FVCGfHAFVwpTvbzBARBfvF24I2k vFUOCkm+832Pm3JLsmFSRUOdL7gXykuo+HIutNFg1UX0E9fhKZEAw6dfXn/xUOLSMC9x75 HawxAE/JY7Vokm/wCsT81GCJOMy/neA= Received: from mail-wm1-f70.google.com (mail-wm1-f70.google.com [209.85.128.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-496-Y-ihUQVuMvGqGm7bSyxxCg-1; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 11:57:30 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Y-ihUQVuMvGqGm7bSyxxCg-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f70.google.com with SMTP id r18-20020a05600c35d200b003cb2ba79692so4163458wmq.5 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 08:57:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=FbtesEIQtGpjTb7OjMSJOp9rZmAQSRxNBv/rzA2OO1I=; b=BaD6J/peJ/aDhI9kRH4ne4N8y5SDa9FdGurEuRGX4b4MTjxbpyl1fapLKZ98CupxAX R9SXfZ5ADw3sVOYP1GRcBHBSBA/B6d3utwPy5jowWbyagv8rzcLk4BzyLcJ2pu1lONOQ XlqzZ6yqKAQ1YDYSFfyTzAowKxKuzEGAXNApi3isyHsCvaw/j+d0vjFRZinzdBnvXr7s NV+G7fk959ZmhS+5utuYKiboXeOJ52EbCtOoT915Iqh7w9tYZmDc/3O6DMX3hrzyjA1L pn8gx9EPeW22SVCOS0qs9r1cu26U1RSIviq/xPUiyPFYCBHSe3iDnuznW1hjm0RlZPHz BP5A== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1Qw1YuIG6Uval5ef/dE4D8Yy9PDP9MOkKw41OE8VidKbqvlbhw /YezHjFnf9XuacvTnrapSc98jTT+WQKYlP/8pMCt98b0rTnlpu+LVWsOdZbykLSjFDRLlm5+wh5 J6NKQqw0u3WWPDEJ3979M0A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4e8a:b0:3c6:da7c:8d71 with SMTP id f10-20020a05600c4e8a00b003c6da7c8d71mr2977266wmq.16.1666799848735; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 08:57:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6DPrFwr6LqWGiqDPt6vYr1O5rBq9HyVWYPjT/tSNTJahdmHosiHsn1o5OSVt1oALr9zLeyhQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4e8a:b0:3c6:da7c:8d71 with SMTP id f10-20020a05600c4e8a00b003c6da7c8d71mr2977260wmq.16.1666799848502; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 08:57:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([31.111.84.238]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o8-20020a5d58c8000000b0022cd27bc8c1sm7186190wrf.9.2022.10.26.08.57.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 26 Oct 2022 08:57:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrew Burgess To: Bruno Larsen , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] gdb/testsuite: remove XFAIL on gdb.cp/temargs.exp In-Reply-To: <20221004170747.154307-12-blarsen@redhat.com> References: <20221004170747.154307-1-blarsen@redhat.com> <20221004170747.154307-12-blarsen@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 16:57:26 +0100 Message-ID: <87k04m60ih.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP 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: Bruno Larsen via Gdb-patches writes: > gdb.cp/temargs.exp last 2 tests always setup an XFAILs, despite checking > for old gcc versions. However, clang does not fail in this test, > turning into XPASSes and slighty annoying when comparing between > compilers. To change this, make the xfails only happen if we are not > using clang. > --- > gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp > index 05fd902bb83..135cf316b90 100644 > --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp > +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/temargs.exp > @@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ if {[test_compiler_info {gcc-[0-3]-*}] > set have_pr_45024_fixed 0 > } > > +set using_clang [test_compiler_info clang-*-*] > + > set line [gdb_get_line_number "Breakpoint 1" $srcfile] > gdb_test "break $srcfile:$line" "Breakpoint 2.*" \ > "set first breakpoint for temargs" > @@ -190,10 +192,10 @@ gdb_test "print F" "&S::somefunc" "test value of F in k2_m" > gdb_continue_to_breakpoint "continue to sixth breakpoint for temargs" > > if $have_older_template_gcc { setup_xfail "*-*-*" > -} else { setup_xfail gcc/49546 "*-*-*" } > +} elseif !$using_clang { setup_xfail gcc/49546 "*-*-*" } Surely, if these XFAIL are for GCC, then the right thing here is to check _for_ GCC, instead of checking !Clang? I'd assume other non-GCC compilers will also XPASS this test. Thanks, Andrew > gdb_test "ptype F" {type = void \(\*\)\(int\)} "test type of F in k3_m" > > if $have_older_template_gcc { setup_xfail "*-*-*" > -} else { setup_xfail gcc/49546 "*-*-*" } > +} elseif !$using_clang { setup_xfail gcc/49546 "*-*-*" } > gdb_test "print F" { = \(void \(\*\)\(int\)\) 0x[0-9a-f]+ } \ > "test value of F in k3_m" > -- > 2.37.3