From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25313 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2013 07:31:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 25302 invoked by uid 89); 15 Apr 2013 07:31:23 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com (HELO youngberry.canonical.com) (91.189.89.112) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:31:22 +0000 Received: from dslb-088-073-120-068.pools.arcor-ip.net ([88.73.120.68] helo=[192.168.42.216]) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URdsi-0003dF-KP; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:31:16 +0000 Message-ID: <516BACBF.6000000@ubuntu.com> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:31:00 -0000 From: Matthias Klose User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130404 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andreas Schwab CC: Andrew Haley , java-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable java for aarch64 References: <516A8BDB.6000305@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-q2/txt/msg00006.txt.bz2 Am 15.04.2013 09:08, schrieb Andreas Schwab: > Andrew Haley writes: > >> Looks basically OK. What were the failures, though? > > FAIL: TestClosureGC run > FAIL: Array_3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Array_3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Array_3 -O3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Array_3 -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Invoke_1 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Invoke_1 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Invoke_1 -O3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Invoke_1 -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: PR218 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: PR218 -O3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: StackTrace2 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: StackTrace2 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: StackTrace2 -O3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: StackTrace2 -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_2 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_2 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_2 -O3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_2 -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_3 -O3 execution - source compiled test > FAIL: Throw_3 -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: pr83 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: pr83 -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test > FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test > FAIL: sourcelocation -findirect-dispatch output - source compiled test > FAIL: sourcelocation -O3 output - source compiled test > FAIL: sourcelocation -O3 -findirect-dispatch output - source compiled test does the interpreter and the byte code compilation work with these results? Afaicr I did see the exact same set of test failures on other (Debian) architectures in the past too. Matthias