testsuite regressions on trunk, compared to 2.28

[Jiong Wang]

On 21/06/17 18:20, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> arm64:
>> Test results, compared with installed binutils:
>> I: [ld-elf/shared.exp] progression (FAIL -> PASS): Run pr19579
>> W: [ld-elf/shared.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): Run dl6a2 with
>> -Bsymbolic-functions and dlopen on libdl6a.so
>> W: [ld-elf/shared.exp] XPASS: Run pr19719 fun undefined
>> W: [ld-elf/shared.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): Run dl6a5 with
>> -Bsymbolic-functions --dynamic-list-cpp-new and dlopen on libdl6a.so
>> W: [ld-elf/shared.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): Run dl6a7 with
>> --dynamic-list-data -Bsymbolic and dlopen on libdl6a.so
>> W: [ld-elf/shared.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): Run dl6a6 with
>> --dynamic-list-cpp-new -Bsymbolic-functions and dlopen on libdl6a.so
>> W: [ld-aarch64/aarch64-elf.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): ld-aarch64/dt_textrel
>> W: [ld-gc/gc.exp] REGRESSION (PASS -> FAIL): --gc-sections with KEEP
>> 6 REGRESSIONS (0.34%).
>> 2 progressions (0.11%).
>> 1790 tests: 1748 pass (97.65%), 14 fail (0.78%), 11 xfail (0.61%) 1 untested
>> (0.06%).
>>
> I don't see these (probably because of the configure options), but on
> native builds I see:
> ld/testsuite/ld-elf/indirect.exp ...
> FAIL: Run indirect5 3
> FAIL: Run indirect5 4
> FAIL: indirect5c dynsym
> FAIL: indirect5d dynsym

I will look at them, PR 21402 on AArch64.