| Message ID | CAD57uCcwLCJttGUoLDJcfJF16di+w5F9Hp2B78fywnpaMD32UQ@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 13 April 2015 at 15:42, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> wrote: > > On 09/04/15 12:10, Yvan Roux wrote: >> >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65648.c >> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65648.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..e075546 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65648.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ >> +/* { dg-do run } */ >> +/* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-* } { >> "-march=*" } { "-march=armv6" } } */ >> +/* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-* } { "-marm" >> } { "" } } */ >> +/* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-*eabihf } { >> "*" } { "" } } */ >> +/* { dg-options "-mthumb -Os -mfloat-abi=soft" } */ >> +/* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v6 } */ >> + >> +#include "../../gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65648.c" >> + > > Hi Yvan, > > These are always tough to get right. > How about: > /* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-*eabihf } { "*" } > { "" } } */ > /* { dg-options "-Os -mthumb -mfloat-abi=soft" } */ > /* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v6 } */ > /* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v6_ok } */ > ? > > I think the dg-skip-if will avoid the error when testing > arm-none-linux-gnueabihf: > "error: ./pr65648.exe uses VFP register arguments, /tmp/ccXpRQ41.o does > not" > > The dg-require-effective-target should remove the need for the first > dg-skip-if in your options. > I don't think it's worth skipping the test when the user explicitly asks for > -marm. It won't test the > behaviour of the bug but then again, the user overrode the options, so > presumably knows best. Yes it looks better to me, the -marm skipping in my patch was an artifact of testing it for armv6-m > Is there any case where this fails? none that I can think of, Is it ok to commit after I've re-tested it (maybe once 5.1 is released) ? Yvan
On 14 April 2015 at 10:19, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.gcc@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Yvan Roux <yvan.roux@linaro.org> wrote: >> Hi >> >> On 7 April 2015 at 22:02, Yvan Roux <yvan.roux@linaro.org> wrote: >>> On 7 April 2015 at 21:33, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 09:28:51PM +0200, Yvan Roux wrote: >>>>> validation is ongoing, but here is my attempt to add this testcase, >>>>> does it look correct (it's the first time I use that kind of include >>>>> in testsuite) >>>> >>>> The intent is that we have a testcase for all targets at various >>>> optimization levels, plus one with specific options for the particular >>>> target. >>>> If you get at least one FAIL with this patch with Vlad's patch reverted and >>>> no FAILs with that patch, the patch is ok for trunk with the obvious >>>> ChangeLog entry. >> >> As this testcase needs to be executed, we can have some conflict at >> link time, depending on how the libs were compiled. Here is what I've >> for the moment, let me know if it's ok and/or if you have suggestion >> on how to improve it. >> >> - armv6 doesn't support the hard-float ABI in Thumb mode, I disable >> the testcase with this directive, but not sure it's the best way: >> { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-*eabihf } { >> "*" } { "" } }ot >> >> - The original problem was reported on armv6-m arch. but is not >> related to the M profile, if we stick to armv6-m the link will fail on >> compiler which default to the -A profile. As my guess is that -A >> profile is more widely tested, I changed the -march flag to armv6. Do >> you think it's ok ? > > IMO there are enough folks who test M profile. I'd drop all the arch > specific options and just apply the patch. The issue is more related to armv6 than M profile, but if it is widely tested as well I can just commit the torture test if it's ok for Jakub. Thanks, Yvan > Thanks, > Ramana > >> >> With the attached patch there is only 1 FAIL before Vlad's patch on >> the execution of the test and they all PASS when testing >> arm-linux-gnueabi, and the target test is UNSUPPORTED when test >> arm-linux-gnueabihf. >> >> Cheers, >> Yvan >> >> 2105-04-09 Yvan Roux <yvan.roux@linaro.org> >> >> PR target/65648 >> * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65648.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/arm/pr65648.c: New test.
On 14 April 2015 at 10:35, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.gcc@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:32:16AM +0200, Yvan Roux wrote: >>> The issue is more related to armv6 than M profile, but if it is widely >>> tested as well I can just commit the torture test if it's ok for >>> Jakub. >> >> If it is tested by enough people, just the execute.exp test is ok of course. >> >> Jakub > > Yeah the execute.exp test is fine. Ok, I'll commit it this afternoon then. Thanks YVan > Ramana
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65648.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65648.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..88a2fc9 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65648.c @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +/* PR target/65648 */ + +int a = 0, *b = 0, c = 0; +static int d = 0; +short e = 1; +static long long f = 0; +long long *i = &f; +unsigned char j = 0; + +__attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void +foo (int x, int *y) +{ + asm volatile ("" : : "r" (x), "r" (y) : "memory"); +} + +__attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void +bar (const char *x, long long y) +{ + asm volatile ("" : : "r" (x), "r" (&y) : "memory"); + if (y != 0) + __builtin_abort (); +} + +int +main () +{ + int k = 0; + b = &k; + j = (!a) - (c <= e); + *i = j; + foo (a, &k); + bar ("", f); + return 0; +} diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65648.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65648.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e075546 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr65648.c @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +/* { dg-do run } */ +/* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-* } { "-march=*" } { "-march=armv6" } } */ +/* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-* } { "-marm" } { "" } } */ +/* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-*eabihf } { "*" } { "" } } */ +/* { dg-options "-mthumb -Os -mfloat-abi=soft" } */ +/* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v6 } */ + +#include "../../gcc.c-torture/execute/pr65648.c" +