================
@@ -19,3 +19,19 @@
// RUN: %clang --target=arm64 -mlittle-endian -march=armv8.1a -### -c %s 2>&1
| FileCheck -check-prefix=ARM64-GENERICV81A %s
// RUN: %clang --target=arm64 -mlittle-endian -march=armv8.1-a -### -c %s 2>&1
| FileCheck -check-prefix=ARM64-GENERICV81A %s
// ARM64-GENERICV81A: "-cc1"{{.*}} "-triple" "arm64{{.*}}" "-target-cpu"
"generic"{{.*}} "-target-feature" "+v8.1a"{{.*}} "-target-feature" "+neon"
+
+// ===== Architecture extensions =====
+
+// RUN: %clang -target aarch64 -march=armv8.1-a --print-enabled-extensions
2>&1 | FileCheck -check-prefix=ARCH-EXTENSION --implicit-check-not FEAT_ %s
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_ETE
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_LOR
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_TRBE
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_VHE
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_PAN
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_CRC32
+// FIXME: FEAT_FP is optional from v8.0a
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_FP
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_LSE
+// ARCH-EXTENSION: FEAT_RDM
+// FIXME: FEAT_AdvSIMD is optional from v8.0a
----------------
pratlucas wrote:
When adding those tests, I've noticed a few inconsistencies in the list of
extensions enabled per architecture version. Usually, for arch versions, we
only enable mandatory extensions by default, but these don't follow that
approach.
We've seen a few issues recently when adding new CPUs, where it can be tricky
to get a match between the llvm and the TRMs due to this.
I mostly wanted to double-check if this is something we want to
re-visit/discuss.
Do you have any thoughts on this? I'm happy to remove the FIXME lines otherwise.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95805
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
