This is the mail archive of the libffi-discuss@sourceware.org mailing list for the libffi project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Test failures

From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
To: Timothy Wall <twalljava at dev dot java dot net>
Cc: libffi-discuss at sourceware dot org
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:58:43 +0100
Subject: Re: Test failures
References: <4A293888.9080204@redhat.com> <743E9549-5F0F-4F5D-9DE3-E00D34B5EC34@dev.java.net>

Timothy Wall wrote:
> I believe the bad_abi  and bad_typedef tests fail on most platforms,
> since they assume things about FFI_ABI_FIRST, FFI_ABI_LAST, and
> FFI_ABI_DEFAULT which aren't true.
> 
> Looks like cls_longdouble_va.c and huge_struct.c have issues with the
> format string (is "%L.0f" a valid format or should it be "%.02Lf" for
> long double?).

I'll have a look.

> IIRC, XFAIL won't avoid the "(test for excess errors)" compilation
> failures.

I looked at the cls_dbls_struct.c failure on x86_64, and we don't
handle doubles in structs correctly.

Andrew.

References:
- Test failures
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: Test failures
  - From: Timothy Wall

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]