================
@@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple armv7 -fsyntax-only -verify
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple aarch64 -fsyntax-only -verify
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple aarch64 -target-feature -fp-armv8 -target-abi
aapcs-soft -fsyntax-only -verify
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple armv8.1m.main -fsyntax-only -verify
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple aarch64 -fsyntax-only -verify=sve-type
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple aarch64 -target-feature -fp-armv8 -target-abi
aapcs-soft -fsyntax-only -verify=sve-type
-typedef __attribute__((neon_vector_type(2))) int int32x2_t; //
expected-error{{'neon_vector_type' attribute is not supported on targets
missing 'neon', 'mve', 'sve' or 'sme'; specify an appropriate -march= or
-mcpu=}}
-typedef __attribute__((neon_polyvector_type(16))) short poly8x16_t; //
expected-error{{'neon_polyvector_type' attribute is not supported on targets
missing 'neon' or 'mve'; specify an appropriate -march= or -mcpu=}}
+typedef __attribute__((neon_vector_type(2))) int int32x2_t; //
expected-error{{'neon_vector_type' attribute is not supported on targets
missing 'mve'; specify an appropriate -march= or -mcpu=}}
----------------
Lukacma wrote:
The original idea behind this error message was to preserve original behaviour
of the code for MVE, as this patch is only changing NEON. I am thinking that
rather than changing the error message to add note about m class architecture,
I should revert it to its original form. What do you think ?
RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -triple aarch64 -fsyntax-only -verify=sve-type
This run line doesn't generate any error message for neon attributes but only
for sve attribute, if that's what you are asking about.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95224
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
