Re: Commit: Improve GAS testsuite results for various targets

["Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at imgtec dot com>]

Hi Nick,

>   With a new branch coming up, I thought that it would be worthwhile
>   spending a little time trying to improve the testsuite results for
>   various targets.  This first patch fixes various simple GAS testsuite
>   failures, either by correcting the problem, or skipping them or
>   marking them as expected failures if there is no reasonable
>   expectation of them passing.  Some failures do still remain, notably
>   for MIPS based targets, and I hope to find time to look at these in
>   the future.

 What MIPS failures do you have specifically in mind?  I know of just 3 
that are arch-wide:

FAIL: objcopy -shared -z relro (tbss1)
FAIL: objcopy -shared -z relro (tbss2)
FAIL: objcopy -shared -z relro (tbss3)

which I have planned to look into, but kept pushing to a lower priority. 

 There is also:

.../ld/testsuite/ld-mips-elf/tls-multi-got-1-1.s: Assembler messages:
.../ld/testsuite/ld-mips-elf/tls-multi-got-1-1.s:39: Error: attempt to store non-zero value in section `.tbss'
ERROR: -EB -march=mips1 -32 -KPIC .../ld/testsuite/ld-mips-elf/tls-multi-got-1-1.s: assembly failed
UNRESOLVED: Shared library with multiple GOTs and TLS

which I think I'll just bisect to see what started it.  I also need to 
understand what the reason was to put initialised data in `.tbss' in this 
test case -- maybe using `.space' with `tlsvar_ld' like with the other 
symbols there will be equally good for coverage.  Unfortunately the 
circumstances around the addition of this test case look a bit obscure in 
our repo history as the commit predates actual MIPS TLS support, so I'll 
have to spend a bit to sort it out.  Maybe it has never actually worked.

 Then there a bunch of target specific issues.  I think all the IRIX ones 
can be ignored for the purpose of the impending release.  Many of them are 
a result of test framework shortcomings.  I have an idea and a WIP change 
to address some of them, selective testing will be more robust then.

 Of the rest I've had a brief look at and I have some test case fixes to 
address them, e.g. more STB_GNU_UNIQUE exclusions which I missed in my 
previous clean up in this area.  There are some generic bugs I've 
encountered too while looking into these failures and and which I will 
post fixes for once I'm done with the current outstanding MIPS work I 
asked Tristan to wait for (I think I need to limit myself WRT bug 
investigations as I tend to discover more bugs than I fix ;) ).

  Maciej