This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Fix powerpc-specific portions of PR85326
On Apr 15, 2018, at 6:29 PM, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 06:08:44PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>> On Apr 15, 2018, at 5:50 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 04:53:27PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>>>> 2018-04-15 Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.ibm.com>
>>>>
>>>> PR testsuite/85326
>>>> * g++.dg/undef-bool-1.C: New file.
>>>
>>> Tests really shouldn't be added to g++.dg/ directly, but to subdirectories
>>> thereof.
>>> In this case, I think g++.dg/ext/undef-bool-1.C is the right location.
>>> And see below.
>>>
>>> Also, just a single space in between : and description in the ChangeLog
>>> file. Otherwise LGTM, but please wait for PowerPC maintainer ack.
>>>
>>>> * gcc.target/powerpc/powerpc.exp: Remove .C support.
>>>> * gcc.target/powerpc/undef-bool-1.C: Remove file.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/undef-bool-1.C
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/undef-bool-1.C (nonexistent)
>>>> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/undef-bool-1.C (working copy)
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
>>>> +/* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-* } } } */
>>>> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -std=c++11 -DNO_WARN_X86_INTRINSICS" } */
>>>
>>> g++.dg/ tests are cycled through some or all -std= options, so
>>> rather than -std=c++11 you should require effective target c++11,
>>> or if you want to run it for -std=c++11 only and not others, c++11only.
>>> Though in this testcase I don't see a reason why it wouldn't work even with
>>> c++14, c++17 or c++2a.
>>
>> OK, agreed on all fronts. Segher, okay with these changes?
>
> Sure! But does it even need c++11? Maybe something in the headers does?
> (/me tries... Seems to work fine with -std=c++98, too?)
Agreed, there shouldn't be a need to check it so long as we're guaranteed
to have it tested for c++11. I'll remove the option.
Thanks!
Bill
>
> Thanks for the patch,
>
>
> Segher