On Sun, 22 Feb 2026 19:18:46 +0800 Sun Jian wrote: > XFAIL_ADD() registers expected failures using constructor order, but the > associated struct __test_metadata pointer may not be initialized yet. > As a result, xfail entries can end up with a NULL test pointer and never > match at runtime, causing expected failures to be reported as FAIL. > > Store the test case name in the xfail entry and fall back to name-based > matching when the test pointer is unavailable, while keeping the original > pointer-based matching for compatibility.
This looks a bit inelegant, what compiler is this failing on for you? Constructors seem to have a concept of priority so if we have to, we should probably used those for the fix. -- pw-bot: cr
