Re: [PATCH 0/9] misc sparse patches

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 12:36:38AM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> 
> 
> On 19/11/2018 23:59, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 08:44:37PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> >>
> >> Some brief notes about the patches:
> >>
> >>   0001-sparsec-use-a-compatible-exception-model-on-cygwin.patch
> >>   0002-sparsei-add-the-no-jit-options.patch
> >>
> >>     The first two patches fix the use of the llvm tools on cygwin. The test
> >>     suite had 64 test failures (55 + additional 9 fixed by these patches).
> >>     The test suite now runs clean.
> > 
> > I'm not sure to understand what's the difference between the 55 and
> > the 9 additional ones.
> 
> When these patches were written, only 3 'additional test failures'
> were caused by the problems addressed by these patches (backend tests).
> Since then, many more backend tests have been written:
> 
> $ make check
> Makefile:124: Your system does not have libxml, disabling c2xml
> Makefile:146: Your system does not have gtk3/gtk2, disabling test-inspect
>   TEST    __func__ (__func__.c)
>   TEST    abi-integer (abi-integer.c)
> ...
> 
>   TEST    warn-unknown-attribute-yes (Wunknown-attribute-yes.c)
> KO: out of 608 tests, 544 passed, 64 failed
> 	55 of them are known to fail
> make: *** [Makefile:228: check] Error 1
> $ 
> 
> So, the 55 are those marked 'known to fail' the 9 (64 - 55) other
> test failures are fixed by these patches.

Ah yes, OK.

Thanks,
-- Luc



[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [LKML]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Trinity Fuzzer Tool]

  Powered by Linux