From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7882 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2011 22:48:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 7871 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Apr 2011 22:48:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wy0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f175.google.com) (74.125.82.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:48:48 +0000 Received: by wye20 with SMTP id 20so50738wye.20 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:48:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.130.99 with SMTP id r35mr402237wbs.221.1302648527303; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:48:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.104] (66.37.187.81.in-addr.arpa [81.187.37.66]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h11sm4312899wbc.60.2011.04.12.15.48.46 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:48:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DA4D6CC.90102@linaro.org> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:48:00 -0000 From: Ramana Radhakrishnan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Janis Johnson CC: Mike Stump , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com Subject: Re: [testsuite] fix to gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c References: <4D9F24B2.5040001@codesourcery.com> <35462F6B-37E7-40B7-A519-B975BC04B0EB@comcast.net> <4DA4A506.2080907@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <4DA4A506.2080907@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg00942.txt.bz2 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