llvm/0003-XFAIL-missing-abstract-variable.ll-test-on-ppc64le.patch

From 01529ba2c76be37e41713cf7f3eca8b61833e320 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tom Stellard <tstellar@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 15:05:07 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] XFAIL missing-abstract-variable.ll test on ppc64le

It's seems the strategy with this test is to XFAIL it on all
architectures that it fails on.  I wonder if we should be passing
it a specific triple?  Also, from what I can tell, this tests only
runs when llvm is configured with LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE set
to a non-empty value, which is why it may not fail in every build
configuration.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109806
---
 llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/missing-abstract-variable.ll | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/missing-abstract-variable.ll b/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/missing-abstract-variable.ll
index 8f8d404..07a8778 100644
--- a/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/missing-abstract-variable.ll
+++ b/llvm/test/DebugInfo/Generic/missing-abstract-variable.ll
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 ; powerpc64 (and on x86_64 at at least -O2). Presumably this is a SelectionDAG
 ; issue.
 ; FIXME: arm64 is an alias for aarch64 on macs, apparently?
-; XFAIL: powerpc64, aarch64, arm64, hexagon, riscv, sparc
+; XFAIL: powerpc64, aarch64, arm64, hexagon, riscv, sparc, ppc64le
 
 ; Build from the following source with clang -O2.
 
-- 
1.8.3.1