From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: "Kewen.Lin" <linkw@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>,
Peter Bergner <bergner@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rs6000/test: Fix bswap64-4.c with has_arch_ppc64 [PR106680]
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 10:24:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220831152412.GP25951@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <69277846-f587-b79e-f741-a2942d326778@linux.ibm.com>
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 05:33:28PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> Test case bswap64-4.c suffers the issue as its comments:
>
> /* On some versions of dejagnu this test will fail when
> biarch testing with RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix
> '{-m64,-m32}'" due to -m32 being added on the command
> line after the dg-options -mpowerpc64.
> common/config/rs6000/rs6000-common.c:
> rs6000_handle_option disables -mpowerpc64 for -m32. */
>
> As tested, on test machine with dejaGnu 1.6.2, the compilation
> option order looks like: -m32 ... -mpowerpc64, option
> -mpowerpc64 still takes effect; While on test machine with
> dejaGnu 1.5.1, the option order looks like: -mpowerpc64 ... -m32,
> option -mpowerpc64 is disabled by -m32, then the case fails.
*Should* -mpowerpc64 be disabled by -m32? Should *any* explicit
command line flag ever be disabled like that? (Not talking about things
like -m32 -m64, this should be supported for convenience).
-mpowerpc64 -m32 should always mean the same as -m32 -mpowerpc64, that's
the principle of least surprise.
Where then dg-options is placed does not matter in this testcase, both
-m32 -mno-powerpc64 and -m32 -mpowerpc64 are ilp32.
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-31 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-31 9:33 Kewen.Lin
2022-08-31 14:13 ` Peter Bergner
2022-09-01 8:57 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-01 14:57 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-02 0:50 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-02 17:36 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-05 2:25 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-08-31 15:24 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2022-08-31 15:48 ` Peter Bergner
2022-08-31 16:05 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-08-31 17:00 ` Peter Bergner
2022-08-31 19:28 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-08-31 19:53 ` Peter Bergner
2022-08-31 21:07 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-08-31 21:38 ` Peter Bergner
2022-08-31 21:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-08-31 22:17 ` Peter Bergner
2022-09-01 9:05 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-01 15:04 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-02 0:51 ` Kewen.Lin
2022-09-02 17:44 ` Segher Boessenkool
2022-09-05 2:35 ` Kewen.Lin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220831152412.GP25951@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bergner@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=linkw@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).