Patchwork [libitm] Skip static_ctor.C test (PR libitm/51173)

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Rainer Orth
Date Jan. 16, 2012, 5:14 p.m.
Message ID <yddr4yz603j.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/136323/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Rainer Orth - Jan. 16, 2012, 5:14 p.m.
As suggested in the PR, it would be better to just skip the test to
avoid noise in mail-report.log:

WARNING: libitm.c++/static_ctor.C compilation failed to produce executable

The following patch does just that, and simplifies the dg-skip-if on the
way.

Bootstrapped without regressions on i386-pc-solaris2.11.

Ok for mainline?

	Rainer


2012-01-15  Rainer Orth  <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>

	PR libitm/51173
	* testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C: Skip test, note PR, remove
	include, exclude options.
Mike Stump - Jan. 16, 2012, 6:29 p.m.
On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> As suggested in the PR, it would be better to just skip the test to
> avoid noise in mail-report.log:

Usually we avoid noise in the testing log files by making testcases pass?  I know, this one is kinda inelegant, but I'd just leave it as is.  If it doesn't pass on any useful target, I suppose skipping or just removing the testcase would be fine, with the idea that the testcases is added back or reenabled when the PR is fixed.  Let's give the TM people a chance to weigh in, if they'd like, but, if they don't, I'll Ok it if you prefer to disable or remove it.
Rainer Orth - Jan. 17, 2012, 9:53 a.m.
Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net> writes:

> On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> As suggested in the PR, it would be better to just skip the test to
>> avoid noise in mail-report.log:
>
> Usually we avoid noise in the testing log files by making testcases
> pass?  I know, this one is kinda inelegant, but I'd just leave it as

Agreed, but from my understanding this is 4.8 material in this case:
Target Milestone is set to 4.8.0.

> is.  If it doesn't pass on any useful target, I suppose skipping or

It doesn't and is therefore xfailed on *-*-*.

> just removing the testcase would be fine, with the idea that the
> testcases is added back or reenabled when the PR is fixed.  Let's give
> the TM people a chance to weigh in, if they'd like, but, if they
> don't, I'll Ok it if you prefer to disable or remove it.

I'd like to simply disable it if they don't have other preferences.

	Rainer
Aldy Hernandez - Jan. 17, 2012, 12:54 p.m.
> I'd like to simply disable it if they don't have other preferences.

Disabling is fine with me.

Patch

# HG changeset patch
# Parent c013b883e9b76d625eab175a405af3115e16708c
Skip static_ctor.C test (PR libitm/???)

diff --git a/libitm/testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C b/libitm/testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C
--- a/libitm/testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C
+++ b/libitm/testsuite/libitm.c++/static_ctor.C
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ 
 /* { dg-do run } */
 /* { dg-options "-pthread" } */
-/* { dg-xfail-if "" { *-*-* } { "*" } { "" } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "PR libitm/51822" { *-*-* } } */
 /* Tests static constructors inside of transactional code.  */
 
 #include <pthread.h>