On 08/08/14 09:24, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com> wrote:
On 07/08/14 10:43, Bin Cheng wrote:
Hi,
Case pr61772.c scans specific string in assembly file, and it is run for
many different option combinations. When it's tested against different
lto
option combinations on targets like ARM, the generated pr61772.s may only
contain lto object content, rather than assembly codes. The scanning
check
is failed in these cases.
I think disabling lto won't weaken the test since what it tests has
nothing
to do with lto. This patch fixes these failures by disabling lto.
Is it OK?
Hi Bin,
Do you think it would be better to just add -ffat-lto-objects instead? That
way the output would contain the assembly as well. Example patch attached.
We might want check that LTO doesn't optimise the assembly away?
Not actually. It's a compilation time test and IMHO if-conversion
optimization here has nothing to do with lto. Another reason here is
we can't just add a single lto option without support full lto
testing. Consider scenario testing on a target without lto? Please
correct if I was wrong.
Ok, skipping it is fine by me then.
Kyrill
Thanks,
bin
Kyrill
Thanks,
bin
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
2014-08-07 Bin Cheng <bin.ch...@arm.com>
* gcc.dg/torture/pr61772.c: Skip lto running.
