Gentle ping :)
Kind regards,
Torbjörn
On 2026-02-27 15:04, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote:
Hi Richard,
On 2026-02-27 12:33, Richard Earnshaw (foss) wrote:
On 19/02/2026 12:40, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote:
Hi Richard,
On 2026-02-18 13:56, Richard Earnshaw (foss) wrote:
On 17/02/2026 13:09, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote:
Hi,
Can this be picked to releases/gcc-15?
In order for it to apply more cleanly, I would like to also pick
r16-3492-g3cb6c01d2a9ab0 and r16-7262-gf7f2b73b9c1e01.
OK
I did another run over the night and that was a good thing.
I discovered a few new failures that I missed last time.
This would be fixed by also picking r16-5053-gc35bab08191134.
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/attr-neon.c scan-assembler-times .fpu\\s+neon\n 1
These all also xpass'es on trunk for Cortex-M0 (verified with
r16-7367-g7b2e9d01d325f0).
Reported in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=124166
XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-times vect
"OUTER LOOP VECTORIZED" 1
XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-1.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "OUTER LOOP
VECTORIZED" 1
XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-times vect
"OUTER LOOP VECTORIZED" 1
XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-3.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "OUTER LOOP
VECTORIZED" 1
XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-4.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects scan-tree-dump-times vect
"OUTER LOOP VECTORIZED" 1
XPASS: gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-4.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "OUTER LOOP
VECTORIZED" 1
These two also fail on trunk for all of my tested Cortex-M and Cortex-A targets
(verified with r16-7367-g7b2e9d01d325f0).
Reported in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=124164
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/complex/fast-math-complex-mls-float.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
scan-tree-dump vect "Found COMPLEX_ADD_ROT270"
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/complex/fast-math-complex-mls-float.c scan-tree-dump vect
"Found COMPLEX_ADD_ROT270"
These two would be fixed by also picking r16-7207-g9dceb52664d5af.
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/complex/fast-math-complex-mls-half-float.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects
scan-tree-dump vect "Found COMPLEX_ADD_ROT270"
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/complex/fast-math-complex-mls-half-float.c scan-tree-dump vect
"Found COMPLEX_ADD_ROT270"
I've launched another test run with r16-5053-gc35bab08191134 and
r16-7207-g9dceb52664d5af picked on top of the other 3 patches originally
requested to be picked. If there is no new failure, are also these 2 commits
okay to be picked for release/gcc-15?
I'm not too keen with the way this is going. We seem to be building a tower of
semi-random backports with little clear strategy. The lack of links to the
original patch posts means I also need to do a lot of archaeology to find that
information when trying to decide what is OK and what might be problematic.
For example, r16-7207-g9dceb52664d5af seems to be independent of what's being
changed here, so should be part of a separate request.
Please can you provide a single clear list of which patches you're looking to
backport along with links to the original reviews on the mailing list.
Below is the list of the patches that I would like to pick for releases/gcc-15.
While testing the different permutation I identified the below list of patches
that would both improve coverage but also reduce testism related failures.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692214.html
r16-3492-g3cb6c01d2a9ab0
testsuite: arm: remove arm32 check from a few effective-targets
Picking reason: Enables about 2000 more tests (according to commit
message) and allows r16-7155-g74907f407db641 to apply cleaner (still some minor
conflicts to resolve).
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2026-January/707132.html
r16-7155-g74907f407db641
testsuite: arm: rework some target-supports checks to use -mfpu=auto
Picking reason: This change ensures that -mfpu=auto is supplied and thus
ensures that the correct FPU is used for the test cases. This is the real patch
that I'm interested in in order to have less failures for gcc-15.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2026-January/707245.html /
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2026-February/707512.html
r16-7262-gf7f2b73b9c1e01
testsuite: arm: Make arm_neon_ok_nocache consistent with other
effective-targets
Picking reason: This patch was mentioned in a followup mail to
r16-7155-g74907f407db641 in order to avoid change of float ABI if possible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-November/699800.html
r16-5053-gc35bab08191134
testsuite: arm: fix arm_v8_vfp_ok effective-target
Picking reason: This patch fixes test failures exposed by first 3 patches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2026-January/706305.html
r16-7207-g9dceb52664d5af
testsuite: arm: update fast-math-complex-mls-half-float.c
Picking reason: This patch fixes test failures exposed by first 3 patches.
This patch is actually already approved for gcc-15, but it was over a
month ago and I don't know why it's not been picked yet.
Example comparison between with and without the picking:
thumb/arch=armv6s-m/tune=cortex-m0/float-abi=soft/fpu_auto
g++.sum
New tests that FAIL: 6 tests
New tests that PASS: 365 tests
gcc.sum
New tests that FAIL: 64 tests
New tests that PASS: 6449 tests
libstdc++.sum
New tests that FAIL: 2 tests
New tests that PASS: 4 tests
thumb/arch=armv7ve+neon/tune=cortex-a7/float-abi=hard/fpu_auto
g++.sum
No diff
gcc.sum
Tests that now fail, but worked before: 2 tests
Tests that now work, but didn't before: 42 tests
New tests that PASS: 368 tests
libstdc++.sum
No diff
I can provide a full list of what test has changed state etc if need, but it's
a long list...
Hope this makes it easier to you to see where I'm attempting to end up.
Please let me know if you need any additional details.
Kind regards,
Torbjörn
