Re: [PATCH] arm: testsuite: Adapt mve-vabs.c to improved codegen

Christophe Lyon writes: > On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 21:18, Thiago Jung Bauermann > wrote: >> >> Since commit r15-491-gc290e6a0b7a9de this failure happens on on >> armv8l-linux-gnueabihf and arm-eabi: >> >> Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/simd/simd.exp ... >&g

[PATCH] arm: testsuite: Adapt mve-vabs.c to improved codegen

Since commit r15-491-gc290e6a0b7a9de this failure happens on on armv8l-linux-gnueabihf and arm-eabi: Running gcc:gcc.target/arm/simd/simd.exp ... gcc.target/arm/simd/mve-vabs.c: memmove found 0 times FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/mve-vabs.c scan-assembler-times memmove 3 In PR PR target/116010, Andre

Re: [PATCH] gcc/configure: Fix check for assembler section merging support on Arm

"Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes: > On 27/12/2024 21:47, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> In 32-bit Arm assembly, the @ character is the start of a comment so >> the section type needs to use the % character instead. >> >> configure.ac attempts to account

Re: [PATCH] gcc/configure: Fix check for assembler section merging support on Arm

Hello, Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: > This problem was noticed because the recent binutils commit > d5cbf916be4a ("gas/ELF: also reject merge entity size being zero") caused > gas to be stricter about mergeable sections without an entity size: > > configure:2701

[PATCH] gcc/configure: Fix check for assembler section merging support on Arm

In 32-bit Arm assembly, the @ character is the start of a comment so the section type needs to use the % character instead. configure.ac attempts to account for this difference by doing a second try when checking the assembler for section merging support. Unfortunately there is a bug: because the

Re: [PATCH] Fix test failures for enum-alias-{1,2,3} on arm-eabi [PR117419]

confirm that this patch fixes those failures on arm-eabi. Tested-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann -- Thiago

[COMMITTED] MAINTAINERS: Add myself to write after approval

4f643..9257b33ff089 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -344,6 +344,7 @@ Richard Ballricbal02 Scott Bambrough - Wolfgang Bangerth - Gergö Barany- +Thiago Jung Baue

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Fix fallout of turning warnings into errors on 32-bit Arm

Hello Christophe, Christophe Lyon writes: > On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 at 15:29, Richard Earnshaw (lists) > wrote: >> >> On 01/03/2024 14:23, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> > Hi Thiago, >> > >> > Thanks for this, LGTM but I can't approve this, CC'ing Richard. >> > >> > Do have a nitpick, in the gcc/tes

Re: [PATCH] Fix test errors introduced with fix for PR115157

Hello Martin, Martin Uecker writes: > BTW: Did you try the other testsuite patch as well? > > [PATCH] Fix test errors after r15-1394 for sizeof(int)==sizeof(long) > [PR115545] I hadn't, but I did today and the patch is good from our CI's perspective. I replied directly to its email thread. --

Re: [PATCH] Fix test errors after r15-1394 for sizeof(int)==sizeof(long) [PR115545]

Hello, Martin Uecker writes: > This fixes the test failures introduced by the fix for PR115109. > > Tested on x86_64 and also tested with -m32. > > > > Fix test errors after r15-1394 for sizeof(int)==sizeof(long) [PR115545] > > Some tests added to test the type of redeclarations of

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Fix pr115278.cc test when uint32_t isn't unsigned int

Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: > --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr115278.cc > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr115278.cc > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > // { dg-require-effective-target c++11 } > // { dg-additional-options "-fdump-tree-optimized" } > > +#include > #i

[PATCH] testsuite: Fix pr115278.cc test when uint32_t isn't unsigned int

On arm-none-eabi, g++.dg/vect/pr115278.cc fails with: FAIL: g++.dg/vect/pr115278.cc -std=c++14 (test for excess errors) Excess errors: /path/to/gcc.git/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr115278.cc:24:28: error: invalid conversion from 'volatile unsigned int*' to 'volatile uint32_t*' {aka 'volatile lon

Re: [PATCH] Fix test errors introduced with fix for PR115157

Hello Martin, Martin Uecker writes: > This should fix the test failures introduced by the fix for PR115157. > > Tested on x86_64 and also tested with -m32. > > > Fix test errors introduced with fix for PR115157. > > Fix tests introduced when fixing PR115157 that assume > sizeof(enu

[PATCH] libstdc++: testsuite: Skip atomics test if there's no -latomic

On arm-none-eabi, 29_atomics/atomic_float/compare_exchange_padding.cc fails to build: FAIL: 29_atomics/atomic_float/compare_exchange_padding.cc -std=gnu++20 (test for excess errors) Excess errors: /home/bauermann/.cache/builds/combined-tree-thumb-m55-hard-eabi/ld/.libs/ld-new: cannot find -lato

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Turn errors back into warnings in arm/acle/cde-mve-error-2.c

Hello, "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" writes: > On 13/01/2024 20:46, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/acle/cde-mve-error-2.c >> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/acle/cde-mve-error-2.c >> index 5b7774825442..da283a06a54

Re: [PATCH] Fix disabling of year 2038 support on 32-bit hosts by default

Hello Andrew, Andrew Pinski writes: > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 10:40 AM Thiago Jung Bauermann > wrote: >> >> >> Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: >> >> > Hello Luis, >> > >> > Luis Machado writes: >> >> >> >> Appr

[PATCH] Fix disabling of year 2038 support on 32-bit hosts by default

Commit e5f2f7d901ee ("Disable year 2038 support on 32-bit hosts by default") fixed a mismatch between 64-bit time_t in GDB and system headers and 32-bit time_t in BFD. However, since commit 862776f26a59 ("Finalized intl-update patches") gnulib's year 2038 support has been accidentally re-enabled —

[PATCH] testsuite: Turn errors back into warnings in arm/acle/cde-mve-error-2.c

Since commit 2c3db94d9fd ("c: Turn int-conversion warnings into permerrors") the test fails with errors such as: FAIL: gcc.target/arm/acle/cde-mve-error-2.c -O0 (test for errors, line 32) FAIL: gcc.target/arm/acle/cde-mve-error-2.c -O0 (test for errors, line 33) FAIL: gcc.target/arm/

[PATCH] testsuite: Fix fallout of turning warnings into errors on 32-bit Arm

Since commits 2c3db94d9fd ("c: Turn int-conversion warnings into permerrors") and 55e94561e97e ("c: Turn -Wimplicit-function-declaration into a permerror") these tests fail with errors such as: FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr59858.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr65647.c (test for exc

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: aarch64: Adjust SVE ACLE tests to new generated code

Hello Richard, Richard Sandiford writes: > Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gcc-patches writes: >> Since commit e7a36e4715c7 "[PATCH] RISC-V: Support simplify (-1-x) for >> vector." these tests fail on aarch64-linux: >> >> === g++ tests === >>

[PATCH] testsuite: aarch64: Adjust SVE ACLE tests to new generated code

Since commit e7a36e4715c7 "[PATCH] RISC-V: Support simplify (-1-x) for vector." these tests fail on aarch64-linux: === g++ tests === Running g++:g++.target/aarch64/sve/acle/aarch64-sve-acle-asm.exp ... FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/sve/acle/asm/subr_s8.c -std=gnu++98 -O2 -fno-schedule

Re: [PATCH] Remove XFAIL from gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/unroll-7.c

Richard Sandiford writes: > Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gcc-patches writes: >> This test passes since commit e41103081bfa "Fix undefined behaviour in >> profile_count::differs_from_p", so remove the xfail annotation. >> >> Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, armv8l

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Adjust g++.dg/gomp/pr58567.C to new compiler message

Hello Tobias, Tobias Burnus writes: > On 18.08.23 23:24, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> Tobias Burnus writes: >>> the patch looks good to me. Thanks! Can you commit the patch yourself or >>> do you need someone to do this for you? >> Thank you! I don'

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Adjust g++.dg/gomp/pr58567.C to new compiler message

3 18:17, Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gcc-patches wrote: >> Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: >> >>> Commit 92d1425ca780 "c++: redundant targ coercion for var/alias tmpls" >>> changed the compiler error message in this testcase from >>> >>> : In instant

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Improve test in dg-require-python-h

2023-08-17 at 23:30 -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> > If GCC is tested with a sysroot which doesn't contain a Python >> > installation (e.g., with a command such as >> > "make check-gcc-c FLAGS_UNDER_TEST="--sysroot=/some/path"), but >> >

[PATCH] testsuite: Improve test in dg-require-python-h

If GCC is tested with a sysroot which doesn't contain a Python installation (e.g., with a command such as "make check-gcc-c FLAGS_UNDER_TEST="--sysroot=/some/path"), but there's a python3-config in $PATH, then the testsuite will pick up the host's Python.h which can't actually be used: Executing o

[PATCH] Remove XFAIL from gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/unroll-7.c

This test passes since commit e41103081bfa "Fix undefined behaviour in profile_count::differs_from_p", so remove the xfail annotation. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, armv8l-linux-gnueabihf and x86_64-linux-gnu. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.dg/unroll-7.c: Remove xfail. --- gcc/testsuite/g

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Adjust g++.dg/gomp/pr58567.C to new compiler message

Hello, Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: > Commit 92d1425ca780 "c++: redundant targ coercion for var/alias tmpls" > changed the compiler error message in this testcase from > > : In instantiation of 'void foo() [with T = int]': > :14:11: required from here &

[PATCH] testsuite: Adjust g++.dg/gomp/pr58567.C to new compiler message

Commit 92d1425ca780 "c++: redundant targ coercion for var/alias tmpls" changed the compiler error message in this testcase from : In instantiation of 'void foo() [with T = int]': :14:11: required from here :8:22: error: 'int' is not a class, struct, or union type :8:22: error: 'int' is not a cla

Re: Fix profile update in scale_profile_for_vect_loop

Hello, Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches writes: > Hi, > when vectorizing 4 times, we sometimes do > for > <4x vectorized body> > for > <2x vectorized body> > for > <1x vectorized body> > > Here the second two fors handling epilogue never iterates. > Currently vecotrizer thinks tha

Re: [PATCH] [vect]Use intermiediate integer type for float_expr/fix_trunc_expr when direct optab is not existed.

Hello, liuhongt via Gcc-patches writes: > I notice there's some refactor in vectorizable_conversion > for code_helper,so I've adjusted my patch to that. > Here's the patch I'm going to commit. > > We have already use intermidate type in case WIDEN, but not for NONE, > this patch extended that.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] cprop_hardreg: Enable propagation of the stack pointer if possible.

Hello, Jeff Law writes: > On 6/19/23 22:52, Tamar Christina wrote: > >>> It's a bit hackish, but could we reject the stack pointer for operand1 in >>> the >>> stack-tie? And if we do so, does it help? >> Yeah this one I had to defer until later this week to look at closer because >> what I'

Re: [PATCH 2/2] cprop_hardreg: Enable propagation of the stack pointer if possible.

Hello Manolis, Philipp Tomsich writes: > On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 00:18, Jeff Law wrote: >> >> On 5/25/23 06:35, Manolis Tsamis wrote: >> > Propagation of the stack pointer in cprop_hardreg is currenty forbidden >> > in all cases, due to maybe_mode_change returning NULL. Relax this >> > restrict

Re: [PATCH] [contrib] validate_failures.py: Don't consider summary line in wrong place

Jeff Law writes: > On 6/16/23 06:02, Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gcc-patches wrote: >> contrib/ChangeLog: >> * testsuite-management/validate_failures.py (IsInterestingResult): >> Add result_set argument and use it. Adjust callers. > Thanks. I pushed this

[PATCH] [contrib] validate_failures.py: Don't consider summary line in wrong place

When parsing a summary or manifest file, if we're not either after a tool line (e.g. "=== gdb tests ===") or before a summary line (e.g., "=== gdb Summary ===") then the current line can't be a valid result line so ignore it. This addresses a problem we're seeing when running the GDB testsuite in