On 01/16/2013 06:05 PM, Joey Ye wrote:
> Test cases for previous patch "no lr save for non-far branches in leaf
> function".
>
> * gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-1.c: New.
> * gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-2.c: New.
>
> Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-2.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-2.c (revision 0)
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-2.c (revision 0)
> @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
> +/* Check for thumb1 far jump. This is the extreme case that far jump
> + * will be used with minimum number of instructions. By passing this case
> + * it means the heuristic of saving lr for far jump meets the most extreme
> + * requirement. */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_thumb1_ok } */
> +/* { dg-options "-Os" } */
> +/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! { arm_thumb1 } } } */
The effective target arm_thumb1_ok returns 1 if it's OK to add -mthumb
to the current multilib flags and together they generate code for
Thumb-1. arm_thumb1 says that the current multilib flags generate
code for Thumb-1.
If you want to add -mthumb to the test then use:
/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_thumb1_ok } */
/* { dg-options "-Os -mthumb" } */
Otherwise use
/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! arm_thumb1 } } */
/* { dg-options "-Os" } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "push.*lr" } } */
> Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-1.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-1.c (revision 0)
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-1.c (revision 0)
> @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
> +/* Check for thumb1 far jump. Shouldn't save lr for small leaf functions
> + * even with a branch in it. */
> +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_thumb1_ok } */
> +/* { dg-options "-Os" } */
> +/* { dg-skip-if "" { ! { arm_thumb1 } } } */
Same here.
The tests are OK with those changes, but please wait a day or two
for other comments or a clear OK from an ARM maintainer.
Janis
