On 11.02.2015 20:07, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 11.02.2015 20:03, Philip Martin wrote:
>> Branko Čibej <brane_at_wandisco.com> writes:
>>
>>> I'm seeing this in the logs on the svn-x64-macosx-bdb builder on trunk:
>>>
>>> $ cat fails.log
>>> [[[
>>> XPASS: fs-test 44: test reopen and modify txn [[WIMP: txn_dir_cache fail in FSFS]]
>>> ]]]
>>>
>>>
>>> Philip, I think that's your pigeon; can you please check if this is a
>>> fluke, or if we can remove the XFAIL/Work-In-Progress tags from this
>>> test case?
>> The test shows a bug in FSFS, on that backend the test will XFAIL.
>> There is no corresponding bug in BDB of FSX so there the test is an
>> XPASS. XPASS/WIMP appears to be the best way to describe a C test that
>> behaves that way. I suppose XFAIL/WIMP might also work. I don't think
>> there is an easy way to mark a C test as PASS on some backends and FAIL
>> on others.
> You're right, there's not. OK, as long as this is expected, fine.
>
> Of course, we can always invent new predicate macros for the C tests ...
> I'll see if I can come up with an FS-type-aware predicate.
r1659101 introduces run-time predicates to the test suite
infrastructure. We used to have only compile-time conditions, and that's
clearly not enough to test the FS type, which is a run-time property.
That test now is now marked as XFAIL, unless the FS type is not FSFS, in
which case it's a PASS.
-- Brane
Received on 2015-02-11 23:02:08 CET