From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 117785 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2015 13:49:05 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 117723 invoked by uid 89); 20 Aug 2015 13:49:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_20,KAM_ASCII_DIVIDERS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: eu-smtp-delivery-143.mimecast.com Received: from eu-smtp-delivery-143.mimecast.com (HELO eu-smtp-delivery-143.mimecast.com) (146.101.78.143) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:49:02 +0000 Received: from cam-owa2.Emea.Arm.com (fw-tnat.cambridge.arm.com [217.140.96.140]) by eu-smtp-1.mimecast.com with ESMTP id uk-mta-33-t4BicnkvTE6jQNbVsbBpJQ-1; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:48:57 +0100 Received: from [10.2.207.50] ([10.1.2.79]) by cam-owa2.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:48:57 +0100 Message-ID: <55D5DAC9.6070001@arm.com> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:53:00 -0000 From: Kyrill Tkachov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christian Bruel , "msebor@redhat.com" , "ramana.radhakrishnan@foss.arm.com" , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH testsuite, ARM] skip Wno-frame-address tests References: <55D5D9E4.2050806@st.com> In-Reply-To: <55D5D9E4.2050806@st.com> X-MC-Unique: t4BicnkvTE6jQNbVsbBpJQ-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg01204.txt.bz2 Hi Christian, On 20/08/15 14:45, Christian Bruel wrote: > Hello, > > 2 tests from rev 226480 introduced a new failure for ARM testing -Werror > because a warning is always emitted regardless -Wframe-address is given > or not. > > From expand_builtin_frame_address: > > /* Some ports cannot access arbitrary stack frames. */ > if (tem =3D=3D NULL) > { > warning (0, "unsupported argument to %qD", fndecl); > return const0_rtx; > } > > This patch just skips the test on ARM that can't access arbitrary stack > frame anyway and will always warn. > > OK for trunk ? thanks, > > Christian > > > > > >=20=09 > > no-frame-address.patch > > > 015-08-20 Christian Bruel > > * gcc.dg/Wno-frame-address.c: Skip for ARM. > * g++.dg/Wno-frame-address.C: Ditto. > > Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wno-frame-address.c > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wno-frame-address.c (revision 227030) > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wno-frame-address.c (working copy) > @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ > /* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-skip-if "Cannot access arbitrary stack frames. " { arm*-*-* } { = "*" } { "" } } */ > /* { dg-options "-Werror" } */ >=20=20=20 > /* Verify that -Wframe-address is not enabled by default by enabling > Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/Wno-frame-address.C > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/Wno-frame-address.C (revision 227030) > +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/Wno-frame-address.C (working copy) > @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ > // { dg-do compile } > +/* { dg-skip-if "Cannot access arbitrary stack frames. " { arm*-*-* } { = "*" } { "" } } */ > // { dg-options "-Werror" } Use the C++-style comment here. Otherwise looks ok to me, though if more tests like this crop we'd want a dg-requires-effective-target check that filters out the targets that don't implement this feature. Kyrill >=20=20=20 > // Verify that -Wframe-address is not enabled by default by enabling