This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Fix g++.dg/pr67989.C test failure when running with -march or -mcpu
- From: Thomas Preud'homme <thomas dot preudhomme at foss dot arm dot com>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Bernd Schmidt <bschmidt at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com>, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo dot tkachov at foss dot arm dot com>, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot radhakrishnan at arm dot com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:35:04 +0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Fix g++.dg/pr67989.C test failure when running with -march or -mcpu
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <11095502 dot M7ODFCTl7m at hardin dot shanghai dot arm dot com> <56968BC8 dot 7030300 at redhat dot com> <19144507 dot 6v3b5dtuDk at hardin dot shanghai dot arm dot com>
Ping?
On Monday, January 18, 2016 11:33:47 AM Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 06:39:20 PM Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > On 01/12/2016 08:55 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > > On Monday, January 11, 2016 04:57:18 PM Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > >> On 01/08/2016 10:33 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > >>> 2016-01-08 Thomas Preud'homme <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com>
> > >>>
> > >>> * g++.dg/pr67989.C: Remove ARM-specific option.
> > >>> * gcc.target/arm/pr67989.C: New file.
> > >>
> > >> I checked some other arm tests and they have things like
> > >>
> > >> /* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-* } {
> > >> "-march=*" } { "-march=armv4t" } } */
> > >> /* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-* } {
> > >> "-mthumb" } { "" } } */
> > >>
> > >> Do you need the same in your testcase?
> > >
> > > That was the first approach I took but Kyrill suggested me to use
> > > arm_arch_v4t and arm_arch_v4t_ok machinery instead. It should take care
> > > about whether the architecture can be selected.
> >
> > Hmm, the ones I looked at did use dg-add-options, but not the
> > corresponding _ok requirement. So I think this is OK.
>
> Just to make sure: ok as in OK to commit as is?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Thomas