* [PATCH] [PATCH][ARM] Fix pr63210.c testcase.
@ 2015-07-23 11:17 Alex Velenko
2015-09-09 16:25 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alex Velenko @ 2015-07-23 11:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: marcus.shawcroft
Hi,
This patch prevents testcase pr63210.c from running with -march=armv4t.
Object size check should be skipped with explicit -march=armv4t, because
expected size is only correct using pop pc instruction which is unsafe for
armv4t. For arm_arch_v5t_ok cases, an explicit -march=armv5t flag is set.
Is patch ok for trunk and fsf-5?
gcc/testsuite
2015-07-23 Alex Velenko <Alex.Velenko@arm.com>
* gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c (dg-skip-if): Skip armv4t.
(dg-additional-options): Add -march=armv5t if arm_arch_v5t_ok.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c
index c3ae928..9b63a67 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
/* { dg-do assemble } */
/* { dg-options "-mthumb -Os " } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_thumb1_ok } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "do not test on armv4t" { *-*-* } { "-march=armv4t" } } */
+/* { dg-additional-options "-march=armv5t" {target arm_arch_v5t_ok} } */
int foo1 (int c);
int foo2 (int c);
--
1.8.1.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] [PATCH][ARM] Fix pr63210.c testcase.
2015-07-23 11:17 [PATCH] [PATCH][ARM] Fix pr63210.c testcase Alex Velenko
@ 2015-09-09 16:25 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2015-09-11 9:51 ` Alex Velenko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ramana Radhakrishnan @ 2015-09-09 16:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Velenko; +Cc: gcc-patches, Marcus Shawcroft
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Alex Velenko <alex.velenko@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch prevents testcase pr63210.c from running with -march=armv4t.
> Object size check should be skipped with explicit -march=armv4t, because
> expected size is only correct using pop pc instruction which is unsafe for
> armv4t. For arm_arch_v5t_ok cases, an explicit -march=armv5t flag is set.
>
> Is patch ok for trunk and fsf-5?
>
OK - please apply to both.
Thanks,
Ramana
> gcc/testsuite
>
> 2015-07-23 Alex Velenko <Alex.Velenko@arm.com>
>
> * gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c (dg-skip-if): Skip armv4t.
> (dg-additional-options): Add -march=armv5t if arm_arch_v5t_ok.
> ---
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c
> index c3ae928..9b63a67 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr63210.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
> /* { dg-do assemble } */
> /* { dg-options "-mthumb -Os " } */
> /* { dg-require-effective-target arm_thumb1_ok } */
> +/* { dg-skip-if "do not test on armv4t" { *-*-* } { "-march=armv4t" } } */
> +/* { dg-additional-options "-march=armv5t" {target arm_arch_v5t_ok} } */
>
> int foo1 (int c);
> int foo2 (int c);
> --
> 1.8.1.2
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] [PATCH][ARM] Fix pr63210.c testcase.
2015-09-09 16:25 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
@ 2015-09-11 9:51 ` Alex Velenko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alex Velenko @ 2015-09-11 9:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ramana Radhakrishnan; +Cc: gcc-patches, Marcus Shawcroft
Hi,
Committed fsf-trunk r227677, fsf-5 r227678.
Kind regards,
Alex
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-09-11 9:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-07-23 11:17 [PATCH] [PATCH][ARM] Fix pr63210.c testcase Alex Velenko
2015-09-09 16:25 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2015-09-11 9:51 ` Alex Velenko
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).