On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On May 25, 2011, at 1:38 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> Janis Johnson <jani...@codesourcery.com> writes: >> >>> Archived test results for 4.7.0 for most processors with C++ results have: >>> >>> XPASS: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr43411.C scan-tree-dump-not optimized "OBJ_TYPE_REF" >>> >>> The only failures I could find were for ia64-linux and ia64-hpux. This >>> patch changes the xfail so it only applies to ia64-*-*. OK for trunk? >> >> Richard rejected a similar patch: > > I see the two issues as orthogonal. One issue it to have an accurate > expectation for the actual testcase on actual targets. The other is to > modify the testcase to test something else. While one can use the XPASS as a > way of keeping track of the issue of improving the testcase, I'd rather > approve the fix to fix the expected state and have people that want to track > the other issue, instead of using XPASS to track that state, to use a PR > instead. > > I think it would be nice to go even farther, and that would be to set the > expected state on all testcases on 6 platforms at the time of release, to > expected, filing PRs for all failures (any unexpected result) so marked and > to actually gate the release on no unexpected results.
The XPASS is suprious - that's the whole point of XPASSes. It should FAIL (well, XFAIL). A patch making it PASS is bogus. Richard.
