gcc 4.3.0 i386 default question

[Joel Sherrill]

Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
>   
>>>>>>> Joel Sherrill writes:
>>>>>>>               
>> Joel> FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/405-mullhw-1.c scan-assembler mullhw
>>
>> Joel> Are those things which would be expected to fail on a vanilla
>> Joel> 603e target without networking or disk?
>>
>> Joel> Is this another category of tests to avoid somehow?
>>
>>       405-mullhw-1.c is invoked with -mcpu=405 and directly scans the
>> assembly language output -- does not try to create an object file or run
>> an executable.  If that fails, you should check if the RTEMS configuration
>> somehow is inhibiting generation of the mullhwX instruction and
>> TARGET_MULHW flag.
>>     
>
> Also, if you use a multilib option in testing, that option goes on the
> command line *after* the options specified in dg-options.  The tests may
> need to use dg-skip-if to skip them if any CPU option other than the one
> in the test is explicitly specified (so it would be tested if no explicit
> -mcpu option is used, or if -mcpu=405 is the multilib option being
> tested).
>   
Since we are running on target hardware, we almost always
use explicit CPU options. In this case, it is -mcpu=603e
so that would break this. We have:

set_board_info cflags "-B${RTEMS_BSP_PATH}/lib/ -specs bsp_specs -qrtems 
-mcpu=603e"

If I read you correctly, then none of these tests can pass on
this target.

If you have a patch, I will happily try it. Otherwise, you will have to
teach me to fish. :-D

--joel
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com
>   


-- 
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
   Support Available             (256) 722-9985