From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-455818-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 40910 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2017 12:24:48 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 40531 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jun 2017 12:24:37 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mail-ua0-f178.google.com
Received: from mail-ua0-f178.google.com (HELO mail-ua0-f178.google.com) (209.85.217.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:24:18 +0000
Received: by mail-ua0-f178.google.com with SMTP id 68so56720866uas.0        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 05:24:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20161025;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date         :message-id:subject:to:cc;        bh=KZ0Ya8MFt72UrvPl4iVse6wt1PZiRX0sV1pPfyl5CsM=;        b=HwHohoou/JC+P5A4VF3i0M84jBbDUENAd7Srj4xdpR0f3mb1IGPgrxAqUIeLQKVUA1         OUbbJjfqokZMIPwXIZFWB++il0nqbHeXG+WKzyoC9ZCdcjRPDpRjUH5SzS4OPMJJeqb2         D7a1AB/8v5ng238lDyg5G1fSdxmJUsg5/bboxRu05i2zNVkkDA86BFmUjVse8r9gjnqC         RMmsEg7JRafmO1K6MCQBTsP6HAHG8MwEXWtAUUNyhI+7ctjb7eYECxaRpo3cTzXqva80         qHlVGAyygHixWfnpy2Dfpf++gHkaQ0R6OZ8507mp+s0bTyRge0VFu49WLh75rTwxUhCo         eeBw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOyRo8aMmBDtPMFs2IriEpZg3tvkNeSOPnlxgvKW398KHEk51nix	QwrDmjTGmVGjr6YtRxKq3KSQmNH3xvNO
X-Received: by 10.176.4.14 with SMTP id 14mr2342480uav.85.1497356652278; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 05:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.50.131 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 05:24:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <593FBAB6.7080607@foss.arm.com>
References: <VI1PR0801MB2031461F4FC6FAF4C03E0C24FFC20@VI1PR0801MB2031.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <593FBAB6.7080607@foss.arm.com>
From: Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:24:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAKdteOaWKAJvL9KO+d1TJ44HqcKggzdtC=TFnonBter_miTa7A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GCC][PATCH][ARM] Require arm_arch_v8a_ok for sdiv_costs_1.c
To: Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@foss.arm.com>
Cc: Tamar Christina <Tamar.Christina@arm.com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>, 	Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com>, Richard Earnshaw <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg00913.txt.bz2

On 13 June 2017 at 12:13, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@foss.arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 13/06/17 11:12, Tamar Christina wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This fixes the failing test gcc.target/arm/sdiv_costs_1.c by
>> requiring arm_arch_v8a_ok.
>>
>>
>> OK for trunk?
>>
>
> Ok.
> Thanks,
> Kyrill
>
>
>> gcc/testsuite/
>> 2017-06-13  Tamar Christina  <tamar.christina@arm.com>
>>
>>         * gcc.target/arm/sdiv_costs_1.c:
>>         Require arm_arch_v8a_ok and add march option.
>>

Shouldn't you use
add_options_for_arm_arch_v8a instead?

>> Thanks,
>> Tamar
>
>