Re: the result of "make check" on PPC64/FC5

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at redhat dot com>]

Wu Zhou wrote:

> Oops, I should have mentioned that I am running these tests on kernel 
> 2.6.15, with Andrea Arcangeli's ptrace patch reversed.
>
> Maybe I should run these tests on FC5 kernel, and reverse Andrea 
> Arcangeli's ptrace patch?
>
> Is there much difference between the 2.6.15 kernel of FC5 and the official 
> 2.6.15 kernel from kernel.org?
>
> Regards
> - Wu Zhou
>
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, Wu Zhou wrote:
>
>  
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I had a try with the latest cvs tree today.
> >
> > The result of "make check" in frysk-imports directory is like this:
> >
> > XFAIL: nestcall/Nest
> > XFAIL: samename/SameName
> > XFAIL: samename/WrongVariable
> > XFAIL: samename/WrongScope.gcj
> > XPASS: packagename/O.out
> > XFAIL: werror/java.sh
> > XFAIL: gcc8544/gcj.sh
> > PASS: logger/Npe
> > PASS: anoncall/Anon
> > PASS: cniinner/a.out
> > PASS: packagename/C.out
> > PASS: werror/cxx.sh
> > PASS: rh174912/gcj.sh
> > PASS: rh174912ice/gcj.sh
> > PASS: rh175569/gcj.sh
> > PASS: process/single_exec
> > PASS: process/multi_child_exec
> > PASS: process/multi_parent_exec
> > PASS: process/multi_child_parent_exec
> > PASS: wrongclass/gcj.sh
> > PASS: cdtparserversion/cdttest.sh
> > PASS: cmdline/print
> > PASS: rh177240/strace-clone-exec.sh
> > PASS: gctest/GCTest
> > PASS: vfork-exec/vfork-exec
> > ==============================================================
> > 1 of 25 tests did not behave as expected (1 unexpected passes)
> > ==============================================================
> >
> > packagename/O.out reports XPASS (unexpected pass).  What is this check 
> > for?  I also notice that packagename/C.out reports PASS.  So the expected 
> > result is that: Class.forName ("packagename.C").getPackage() returns 
> > non-null; and O.class.getPackage() returns null?  What is the result on 
> > x86?
> >    
XFAIL roughly means, there's a bug but it's not frysk's fault.  Here 
older GCC's were broken - the XFAIL - gcc 4.1 however is fixed.
Since so far hasn't been bitten by that specific bug (it was bitten by 
packagename/C) it failing isn't too much of a worry.

BTW, last night I committed some more 64-bit fixage for the above, I 
guess x86-64 is more sensitive.

> > The result of "make check" in frysk-gtk directoy is:
> >
> > SKIP: gcjtreeiter/a.out
> > SKIP: gcjtreeiter/gij.sh
> > SKIP: textiter/a.out
> > ======================
> > All 0 tests passed
> > (3 tests were not run)
> > ======================
> >
> >    
If there's no $DISPLAY, the tests are skipped.  Since they play with GTK 
they can't pass without an X display - now if anyone knows how to get 
around this, is xvfb (x virtual frame buffer) still available somewhere?

> > I don't have any look into these.  Anyone can give me a clue what is the 
> > potential problem?
> >
> > To Diego,
> >
> > Andrew told me that you are working on x86-64 port.  So I guess that you 
> > might be interested in what is going on in PPC64 platform.  Then I 
> > include you on the cc-list.  Please also cc me if you find anything new on 
> > x86-64.  Progress, problems, test results, all these kinds of thing I am 
> > interested.  :-) 
> >
> > Thanks
> > - Wu Zhou
> >
> >
> >    
Andrew