[PATCH, PR 42855] Skip test for PR 42585 on ppc and arm
Martin Jambor
mjambor@suse.cz
Mon Mar 8 16:20:00 GMT 2010
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 11:20:38AM -0800, Janis Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 12:23 +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > test "gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr42585.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized"
> > reportedly fails on powerpc and arm, probably because MOVE_RATIO is
> > not defined for them and so the value of 2 is assumed and therefore
> > total scalarization is not performed. I have therefore changed it to
> > be skipped on the two platforms.
>
> Is it a bug that those targets don't define MOVE_RATIO? If so then the
> test could XFAIL those steps just before the release, but in the
> meantime the relevant maintainers should be made aware of the reason
> for these failures so they can fix them.
>
Even the old SRA used MOVE_RATIO, in fact in very similar fashion. I
therefore assumed that the behavior for those platforms was expected.
OTOH, since it often leads to code size improvements, it is peculiar
that at least arm does not (reportedly) define it.
In the end, the respective maintainers should decide, so I included
them in CC.
> > I have built a c-compiler on ppc and verified it is skipped there and
> > also made sure it is still executed on x86_64. OK for trunk and 4.4?
>
> If it's not a bug, but missing functionality, then it's OK to skip the
> check for those targets.
I don't really care much, I just want to get rid off this issue (that
I sort-of caused).
Thanks,
Martin
> >
> >
> > 2010-03-03 Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>
> >
> > PR testsuite/42855
> > * testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr42585.c: Skip dump scan on powerpc
> > and arm.
> >
> > Index: mine/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr42585.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- mine.orig/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr42585.c
> > +++ mine/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr42585.c
> > @@ -32,6 +32,6 @@ Cyc_string_ungetc (int ignore, struct _f
> > }
> >
> > /* The local aggregates . */
> > -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "struct _fat_ptr _ans" 0 "optimized"} } */
> > -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "struct _fat_ptr _T2" 0 "optimized"} } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "struct _fat_ptr _ans" 0 "optimized" { target { { ! powerpc*-*-* } && { ! arm-*-* } } } } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "struct _fat_ptr _T2" 0 "optimized" { target { { ! powerpc*-*-* } && { ! arm-*-* } } } } } */
> > /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "optimized" } } */
>
>
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list