Another two cases fail in precise test:
-PASS: c-c++-common/simulate-thread/bitfields-3.c -O0 -g thread simulation test +UNSUPPORTED: c-c++-common/simulate-thread/bitfields-3.c -O0 -g thread simulation test -PASS: gcc.dg/simulate-thread/atomic-other-short.c -O0 -g thread simulation test +UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/simulate-thread/atomic-other-short.c -O0 -g thread simulation test
In previous test, we have -PASS: c-c++-common/simulate-thread/bitfields-1.c -O0 -g thread simulation test +UNSUPPORTED: c-c++-common/simulate-thread/bitfields-1.c -O0 -g thread simulation test
-Zhenqiang
On 29 June 2012 11:40, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org wrote:
On 29 June 2012 11:28, Michael Hope michael.hope@linaro.org wrote:
On 29 June 2012 14:57, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.chen@linaro.org wrote:
Michael,
Lots of fails disappear in the precise repawned tests. But there is a new one which pass in previous test but fail in the new test.
~uweigand/gcc-linaro/lp-1010826-4.7-p2/+merge/112036 armv7l-precise-cbuild339-ursa4-cortexa9hfr1
-PASS: gcc.dg/simulate-thread/atomic-other-int.c -O0 -g thread simulation test +UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/simulate-thread/atomic-other-int.c -O0 -g thread simulation test
Not sure there. Ulrich, could that real?
If you check the log in previous test http://ex.seabright.co.nz/build/gcc-linaro-4.7+bzr115000~uweigand~lp-1010826..., the case is not shown as "UNSUPPORTED".
So it seams it is a test environment issue.
Thanks! -Zhenqiang