Thank you for fixing and maintaining the CI! and highlighting the issue
in patch 1/8
--
Cheers,
Guinevere Larsen
It/she
On 6/9/26 11:02 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
Hi Guinevere,
We've found and fixed an issue in Linaro CI.
The problem was that when a regression is detected (solib-precsave.exp
failures in this case), the report also included pre-existing known
failures in the regression list. So your 1/8 patch indeed has an
issue that needs fixing, but only solib-precsave.exp failures are
actual regressions.
Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention!
Kind regards,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org
On Jun 9, 2026, at 14:39, Guinevere Larsen <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6/9/26 12:52 AM, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
Thiago Jung Bauermann <[email protected]> writes:
The FAILs in gdb.threads/ are almost surely regressions not yet marked
as such by our CI. I also see the gdb.base/gdb-sigterm.exp and
gdb.mi/mi-break.exp FAILs on current trunk so they're also false
positives.
Sorry, I mischecked mi-break.exp. It passes fully on current trunk. It's
common for MI tests to be flaky though, so it could also be a case of a
flaky test not yet flagged as such by our CI.
Yeah, based on what is changed by the test, there's nothing outside
of gdb.reverse that would be affected by this test
the solib-precsave.exp failures are definitely concerning though,
thanks for pointing those out!
--
Cheers,
Guinevere Larsen
It/she
_______________________________________________
linaro-toolchain mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
