Ping, Is the fix ok for trunk?
Thanks, Tamar > -----Original Message----- > From: Christophe Lyon [mailto:christophe.l...@linaro.org] > Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 21:39 > To: Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; nd <n...@arm.com>; Ramana Radhakrishnan > <ramana.radhakrish...@arm.com>; Richard Earnshaw > <richard.earns...@arm.com>; ni...@redhat.com; Kyrylo Tkachov > <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC][ARM] Fix fragile arm fpu attribute tests. > > On 21 December 2017 at 15:24, Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> > wrote: > > The 12/14/2017 20:46, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >> On 14 December 2017 at 11:56, Tamar Christina > <tamar.christ...@arm.com> wrote: > >> > The 12/13/2017 08:49, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >> >> On 12 December 2017 at 18:29, Tamar Christina > <tamar.christ...@arm.com> wrote: > >> >> > Hi All, > >> >> > > >> >> > The previous test made use of arm_neon.h which made the whole > >> >> > test rather fragile and only applicable to some of the arm targets. > >> >> > > >> >> > So instead I make use of different fpus now to test the > >> >> > generation of fmla instructions. The actual instruction itself > >> >> > is not tested as all we care about if that the proper .fpu directives > >> >> > are > generated. > >> >> > > >> >> > Regtested on arm-none-eabi and arm-none-linux-gnueabihf with no > >> >> > regressions. > >> >> > > >> >> > Ok for trunk? > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > gcc/testsuite/ > >> >> > 2017-12-12 Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> > >> >> > > >> >> > PR target/82641 > >> >> > * gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute.c: New. > >> >> > * gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute_2.c: New. > >> > > >> > Hi Christophe, > >> > > >> > My apologies, I have rebased the patch. > >> > New Changelog: > >> > > >> > gcc/testsuite/ > >> > 2017-12-14 Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> > >> > > >> > PR target/82641 > >> > * gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute.c: Rewrite to use > >> > no NEON. > >> > * gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute_2.c: Likewise. > >> > > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Sorry I think there is still something wrong with this patch. > >> In pragma_fpu_attribute_2.c, you are not removing #include > >> <arm_neon.h> as the ChangeLog seems to imply? > >> > > > > Sorry that was extremely sloppy of me. I noticed the changelog after > sending > > but hadn't noticed the #include being left in. > > > >> So, with this patch, there are problems on arm-none-linux-gnueabi and > >> arm-none-eabi: > >> FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute.c scan-assembler-times > >> \\.fpu\\s+vfpv3-d16 1 (found 0 times) > >> FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute.c scan-assembler-times > >> \\.fpu\\s+vfpv4 1 (found 0 times) > >> > >> and pragma_fpu_attribute_2.c still fails to compile: > >> In file included from > /gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute_2.c:6: > >> /aci-gcc-fsf/builds/gcc-fsf-gccsrc/obj-arm-none- > eabi/gcc3/gcc/include/arm_neon.h:31:2: > >> error: #error "NEON intrinsics not available with the soft-float ABI. > >> Please use -mfloat-abi=softfp or -mfloat-abi=hard" > >> > >> I'm not sure why you don't see this when testing on arm-none-eabi? > > > > It's because I don't have a compiler configured with only -mfloat-abi=soft. > So when I run > > the tests it's always able to just change the ABI. I resorted to manually > testing it. > > > > I've now prevented the tests from running at all on soft float only targets. > This should fix > > the problem once and for all. > > > > Regtested on arm-none-eabi, arm-none-linux-gnueabi and arm-none- > linux-gnueabihf. > > > > Thanks and sorry for the noise, > > Tamar > > > > Ok for trunk? > > > > gcc/testsuite/ > > 2017-12-21 Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> > > > > PR target/82641 > > * gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute.c: Rewrite to use > > no NEON and require softfp or hard float-abi. > > * gcc.target/arm/pragma_fpu_attribute_2.c: Likewise. > > > FWIW, this version passes validation on my side. > Thanks > > >> > >> If you want to see more details: > >> http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc-test- > patches/255624-rb8655.patch-2/report-build-info.html > >> (ignore the lines with "interrupted", this means there was a problem > >> on the host during the build) > >> > >> Christophe > >> > >> > >> >> > > >> >> Sorry, it seems your patch does not apply against ToT, and > >> >> the ChangeLog looks incorrect (these are not new files) > >> >> > >> >> Christophe > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Tamar > >> > > >> > -- > > > > --
