[testsuite] fix to gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c

[testsuite] fix to gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c

[Janis Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 511 bytes --]

Test gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c specifies -march=armv7-a and fails
execution for multilibs whose hardware or simulator doesn't support that
architecture.  The test doesn't depend on that option, and without it
will occasionally run for such a target anyway.  This patch removes the
option, letting it pass for all multilibs.

I don't yet have an FSF copyright assignment (it's currently in the
hands of the FSF) but this patch is small enough to not require one.  If
this is OK someone else will need to appy it.

[-- Attachment #2: gcc-20110407-1 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

2011-04-08  Janis Johnson  <janisjo@codesourcery.com>

	* gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c: Remove -march option.

Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c	(revision 320350)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c	(working copy)
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 /* { dg-do run } */
-/* { dg-options "-Os -march=armv7-a" } */
+/* { dg-options "-Os" } */
 #include <stdint.h>
 #include <stdlib.h>
 

Re: [testsuite] fix to gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c

[Mike Stump]

On Apr 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
> Test gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c specifies -march=armv7-a and fails
> execution for multilibs whose hardware or simulator doesn't support that
> architecture.

Ideally, I'd like target people to weigh in on target changes, ssa people to weigh in on ssa testcases and so on...  If they don't approve or reject it soon, I'll weigh in...  I don't see any reason not to approve it.

Re: [testsuite] fix to gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c

[Janis Johnson]

On 04/08/2011 04:37 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
>> Test gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c specifies -march=armv7-a and fails
>> execution for multilibs whose hardware or simulator doesn't support that
>> architecture.
> 
> Ideally, I'd like target people to weigh in on target changes, ssa people to weigh in on ssa testcases and so on...  If they don't approve or reject it soon, I'll weigh in...  I don't see any reason not to approve it.

Ramana, is this change OK?  Please look also at a patch for gcc.target/arm/sync-1.c that I submitted right after this one.

Janis

Re: [testsuite] fix to gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c

[Ramana Radhakrishnan]

On 12 April 2011 20:16, Janis Johnson <janisjo@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 04/08/2011 04:37 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Apr 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
>>> Test gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c specifies -march=armv7-a and fails
>>> execution for multilibs whose hardware or simulator doesn't support that
>>> architecture.
>>
>> Ideally, I'd like target people to weigh in on target changes, ssa people to weigh in on ssa testcases and so on...  If they don't approve or reject it soon, I'll weigh in...  I don't see any reason not to approve it.
>
> Ramana, is this change OK?  Please look also at a patch for gcc.target/arm/sync-1.c that I submitted right after this one.

This is OK.

cheers
Ramana

Re: [testsuite] fix to gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c

[Ramana Radhakrishnan]

On 12/04/11 20:16, Janis Johnson wrote:
> On 04/08/2011 04:37 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Apr 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
>>> Test gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c specifies -march=armv7-a and fails
>>> execution for multilibs whose hardware or simulator doesn't support that
>>> architecture.
>>
>> Ideally, I'd like target people to weigh in on target changes, ssa people to weigh in on ssa testcases and so on...  If they don't approve or reject it soon, I'll weigh in...  I don't see any reason not to approve it.
>
> Ramana, is this change OK?  Please look also at a patch for gcc.target/arm/sync-1.c that I submitted right after this one.
>


I have committed both these patches into trunk - Thanks .


Ramana
> Janis