On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 01:43:22PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> Thanks for your work on this issue, I have tested your change with my
> usual powerpc-gnu-linux multilibs with the old and new result for
> gcc.c-torture/compile/pr60655-2.c noted on the right:
>
> -mcpu=603e FAIL -> PASS
> -mcpu=603e -msoft-float FAIL -> PASS
> -mcpu=8540 -mfloat-gprs=single -mspe=yes -mabi=spe FAIL -> PASS
> -mcpu=8548 -mfloat-gprs=double -mspe=yes -mabi=spe FAIL -> PASS
> -mcpu=7400 -maltivec -mabi=altivec FAIL -> PASS
> -mcpu=e6500 -maltivec -mabi=altivec FAIL -> PASS
> -mcpu=e5500 -m64 PASS -> PASS
> -mcpu=e6500 -m64 -maltivec -mabi=altivec PASS -> PASS
>
> -- please note that the test case used to pass for 64-bit multilibs even
> before your fix so unless your powerpc64-linux configuration includes
> 32-bit multilibs as well, it does not really provide suitable coverage.
I always build powerpc64-linux with --enable-targets=powerpc-linux and
regression test with RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=unix/'{-m32,-m64}',
so my "bootstrapped and regression tested powerpc64-linux" claim
includes a -m32 regression test too. Not quite as comprehensive a
test as you've done (thanks!), but I did see the FAIL->PASS for -m32.
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
