on 2024/8/1 15:04, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 9:00 PM Qing Zhao <qing.z...@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Kewen,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for fixing this testing case issue.
>> Yes, the change LGTM though I can’t approve it.
>
> OK.
Thanks to all, pushed as r15-2658.
BR,
Kewen
>
> Richard.
>
>> Qing
>>
>>> On Jul 31, 2024, at 05:22, Kewen.Lin <li...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As Andrew pointed out in PR116148, fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c
>>> was designed for little-endian, the recent commit r15-2403 made it
>>> be tested with running on BE and PR116148 got exposed.
>>>
>>> This patch is to adjust the expected data for members in with_fam_2_v
>>> and with_fam_3_v by considering endianness, also update with_fam_3_v.b[1]
>>> from 0x5f6f7f7f to 0x5f6f7f8f to avoid two "7f"s.
>>>
>>> Tested on powerpc64-linux-gnu P8/P9 and powerpc64le-linux-gnu P9/P10.
>>>
>>> Is it ok for trunk?
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Kewen
>>> -----
>>> PR testsuite/116148
>>>
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> * c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c: Define macros
>>> WITH_FAM_2_V_B[03] and WITH_FAM_3_V_A[07] as endianness, update the
>>> checking with these macros and initialize with_fam_3_v.b[1] with
>>> 0x5f6f7f8f instead of 0x5f6f7f7f.
>>> ---
>>> .../fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c | 22 ++++++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c
>>> b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c
>>> index 93f9d5128f6..7845a7fbab3 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/fam-in-union-alone-in-struct-2.c
>>> @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ union with_fam_2 {
>>> union with_fam_3 {
>>> char a[];
>>> int b[];
>>> -} with_fam_3_v = {.b = {0x1f2f3f4f, 0x5f6f7f7f}};
>>> +} with_fam_3_v = {.b = {0x1f2f3f4f, 0x5f6f7f8f}};
>>>
>>> struct only_fam {
>>> int b[];
>>> @@ -28,16 +28,28 @@ struct only_fam_2 {
>>> int b[];
>>> } only_fam_2_v = {{7, 11}};
>>>
>>> +#if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_2_V_B0 0x4f
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_2_V_B3 0x1f
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_3_V_A0 0x4f
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_3_V_A7 0x5f
>>> +#else
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_2_V_B0 0x1f
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_2_V_B3 0x4f
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_3_V_A0 0x1f
>>> +#define WITH_FAM_3_V_A7 0x8f
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> int main ()
>>> {
>>> if (with_fam_1_v.b[3] != 4
>>> || with_fam_1_v.b[0] != 1)
>>> __builtin_abort ();
>>> - if (with_fam_2_v.b[3] != 0x1f
>>> - || with_fam_2_v.b[0] != 0x4f)
>>> + if (with_fam_2_v.b[3] != WITH_FAM_2_V_B3
>>> + || with_fam_2_v.b[0] != WITH_FAM_2_V_B0)
>>> __builtin_abort ();
>>> - if (with_fam_3_v.a[0] != 0x4f
>>> - || with_fam_3_v.a[7] != 0x5f)
>>> + if (with_fam_3_v.a[0] != WITH_FAM_3_V_A0
>>> + || with_fam_3_v.a[7] != WITH_FAM_3_V_A7)
>>> __builtin_abort ();
>>> if (only_fam_v.b[0] != 7
>>> || only_fam_v.b[1] != 11)
>>> --
>>> 2.45.2
>>
