Don't hardcode the number of gencgc generations.

[sbcl.git] / contrib / sb-introspect / test-driver.lisp

diff --git a/contrib/sb-introspect/test-driver.lisp b/contrib/sb-introspect/test-driver.lisp
index e31b2a3..aa7bfc8 100644 (file)
--- a/contrib/sb-introspect/test-driver.lisp
+++ b/contrib/sb-introspect/test-driver.lisp
@@ -299,7 +299,9 @@
   t)
 
 ;;; Skip the whole damn test on GENCGC PPC -- the combination is just
-;;; to flaky for this to make too much sense.
+;;; to flaky for this to make too much sense.  GENCGC SPARC almost
+;;; certainly exhibits the same behavior patterns (or antipatterns) as
+;;; GENCGC PPC.
 ;;;
 ;;; -- It appears that this test can also fail due to systematic issues
 ;;; (possibly with the C compiler used) which we cannot detect based on
@@ -311,12 +313,13 @@
 (deftest* (allocation-information.4
            ;; Ignored as per the comment above, even though it seems
            ;; unlikely that this is the right condition.
-           :fails-on (or :win32 (and :ppc :gencgc)))
+           :fails-on (or :win32 (and (or :ppc :sparc) :gencgc)))
     #+gencgc
     (tai #'cons :heap
          ;; FIXME: This is the canonical GENCGC result. On PPC we sometimes get
          ;; :LARGE T, which doesn't seem right -- but ignore that for now.
-         '(:space :dynamic :generation 6 :write-protected t :boxed t :pinned nil :large nil)
+         `(:space :dynamic :generation ,sb-vm:+pseudo-static-generation+
+           :write-protected t :boxed t :pinned nil :large nil)
          :ignore (list :page #+ppc :large))
     #-gencgc
     (tai :cons :heap