From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-296289-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 20208 invoked by alias); 7 Jul 2011 20:27:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 20197 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jul 2011 20:27:34 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from qmta05.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (HELO qmta05.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net) (76.96.30.48)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:27:20 +0000
Received: from omta11.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.36])	by qmta05.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast	id 58K51h0070mlR8UA58THa9; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:27:17 +0000
Received: from up.mrs.kithrup.com ([24.4.193.8])	by omta11.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast	id 58TF1h00X0BKwT48X8TGg3; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:27:17 +0000
Subject: Re: PATCH: Support -mx32 in GCC tests
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOq35NZwqNOKiMBBV7N=DrY1wAUkWJAd=uTTufA5=_yr=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 20:33:00 -0000
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>, ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9465533F-4342-45EC-A97D-DFC1B15F0181@comcast.net>
References: <20110707172953.GA6453@intel.com> <EF8D08F4-B0BC-4DDF-8E1A-08320AF90C07@comcast.net> <CAMe9rOq35NZwqNOKiMBBV7N=DrY1wAUkWJAd=uTTufA5=_yr=A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00558.txt.bz2

On Jul 7, 2011, at 11:26 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> -/* { dg-do compile { target { { i?86-*-* rs6000-*-* alpha*-*-* x86_64-*-=
* } || { powerpc*-*-* && ilp32 } } } } */
> +/* { dg-do compile { target { { i?86-*-* rs6000-*-* alpha*-*-* x86_64-*-=
* } || { powerpc*-*-* && ia32 } } } } */

powerpc doesn't have an ia32 product?

I think this shouldn't change?

> -/* Disable the test entirely for 16-bit targets.  */
> -#if __INT_MAX__ > 32767
> +/* Disable the test entirely for 16-bit and x32 targets.  */
> +#if __INT_MAX__ > 32767 && (!defined __x86_64__ || defined __LP64__)

While not too important, might a dg-skip-if line be easier to read and unde=
rstand?

> -/* { dg-do compile { target { { { ! mips64 } && { ! ia64-*-* } } && { ! =
spu-*-* } } } } */
> +/* { dg-do compile { target { { { { ! mips64 } && { ! ia64-*-* } } && { =
! spu-*-* } } && { ! x32 } } } } */


Hum, I worry about x86 walking away with large amounts of symbol space.  Pl=
ease change to x86 && x32 or x86_x32.

> -/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-do compile { target { x32 || lp64 } } } */

Likewise.


> OK for trunk?

Aside from the points above points, Ok.  Please give Uros a day or two to w=
eigh in with his comments.  I'm expecting that he's fine with the patch.