From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-428990-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 38556 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2016 10:31:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 38544 invoked by uid 89); 3 Jun 2016 10:31:57 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=downlevel, vsxelemrev, PR70957, pr70957
X-HELO: gate.crashing.org
Received: from gate.crashing.org (HELO gate.crashing.org) (63.228.1.57) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 10:31:55 +0000
Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u53AVdXj025745;	Fri, 3 Jun 2016 05:31:40 -0500
Received: (from segher@localhost)	by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id u53AVdeT025737;	Fri, 3 Jun 2016 05:31:39 -0500
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 10:31:00 -0000
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Fix PR70957 (skip vsx-elemrev-[24].c tests for a downlevel assembler)
Message-ID: <20160603103138.GC1622@gate.crashing.org>
References: <357F7A5D-0FB5-41F9-8959-E9A3366A0D51@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <357F7A5D-0FB5-41F9-8959-E9A3366A0D51@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-06/txt/msg00263.txt.bz2

On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 03:50:21PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> The only way I know to make the test predictable is to use a run-time test to check whether
> P9 vector instructions will execute.  Thus this solution.  I’ve verified we no longer have test
> failures on machines with a downlevel assembler, and the tests run correctly on machines
> with an up-to-date assembler.  Is this ok for trunk and 6.2?

This is fine.  Okay for both.  Thanks,


Segher