The pass/fail groupings are probably a good idea. Not sure why those inorder tests are failing, but I should be able to take a look tomorrow. I haven't been paying too close of attention to the changesets so I'm not sure off-hand what could be the culprit.
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Gabe Black <gbl...@eecs.umich.edu> wrote: > Cron Daemon wrote: > > ***** build/ALPHA_SE/tests/fast/long/70.twolf/alpha/tru64/inorder-timing > FAILED! > > ***** build/ALPHA_SE/tests/fast/long/50.vortex/alpha/tru64/inorder-timing > FAILED! > > > > I don't know if anybody noticed these. There were a couple last week > too, apparently. Since we have so many results these days, maybe we > should group them pass/fail? That would make it harder to miss failures > and make looking at the results much easier. > > Gabe > _______________________________________________ > m5-dev mailing list > m5-dev@m5sim.org > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev > -- - Korey
_______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
