Re: [PATCH 2/2] Remove pass in skip_unwinder_tests

[Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>]

On 08/24/2012 02:37 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 11:49:49 +0200, Yao Qi wrote:
>> > As we discussed, proc skip_unwinder_tests should not generate any FAIL
>> > or PASS in test summary,
> During comparison across releases and testsuite modes it makes the diffs more
> difficult to read:
> 
>  Running gdb/testsuite/gdb.java/jnpe.exp ...
>  PASS: gdb.java/jnpe.exp: compilation jnpe.java
> -FAIL: gdb.java/jnpe.exp: check for unwinder hook
>  PASS: gdb.java/jnpe.exp: disable SIGSEGV for next-over-NPE
>  PASS: gdb.java/jnpe.exp: next over NPE
> -PASS: gdb.java/jnpe.exp: continue to success for next-over-NPE
> +FAIL: gdb.java/jnpe.exp: continue to success for next-over-NPE
> 
> 
> Has the last testcase regressed because the check "check for unwinder hook" is
> therefore no longer there?  Does it PASS or FAIL now? etc.

I disagree.  Such cases will always happen.  Tests are removed, changed and
renamed all the time.

Nothing actually FAILed here.  We have lots of precedent for "supports-foo" or
"try this" style functions that issue no FAIL.  It is expected that
some systems won't have the unwinder hooks.  In the absurd, issuing a FAIL for
these cases would be like issuing FAILs when tests are skipped because
a [istarget "foobar-*-*"] returns false.

-- 
Pedro Alves