On 2024-08-27 13:49, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 13/08/2024 17:18, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
I'm not a maintainer but I'd argue the entire test is bogus.
The error reporting in this area seems to be somewhat fragile, if you compile it with
'-march=armv7-a -mfloat-abi=soft', you als
On 13/08/2024 17:18, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> I'm not a maintainer but I'd argue the entire test is bogus.
>
> The error reporting in this area seems to be somewhat fragile, if you compile
> it with '-march=armv7-a -mfloat-abi=soft', you also don't get the error this
> is testing for. I'd
I'm not a maintainer but I'd argue the entire test is bogus.
The error reporting in this area seems to be somewhat fragile, if you
compile it with '-march=armv7-a -mfloat-abi=soft', you also don't get
the error this is testing for. I'd argue this kind of user friendly
error message should jus
Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-14?
--
Cortex-M55 supports VFP, but does not contain neon, so the test is
invalid in this context.
Without this patch, the following error can be seen in the logs:
.../attr-neon-builtin-fail2.c: In function 'foo':
.../attr-neon-builtin-fail2.c:13:27: error: implici
