[committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[John David Anglin]

The hppa target is a reload target and asm goto is not supported on reload targets.
Skip failing tests on hppa.

Committed to master.

Regards,
Dave

Skip asm goto tests on hppa*-*-*.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	PR testsuite/97987
	* gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c: Skip on hppa.
	* gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c: Likewise.

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c
index f1b30c02884..d2d2ac536bd 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 /* This test should be switched off for a new target with less than 4 allocatable registers */
 /* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "Reload target" { hppa*-*-* } } */
 int
 foo (void)
 {
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c
index 94c14dd4005..ce751ced90c 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 /* Test to generate output reload in asm goto on x86_64.  */
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-skip-if "no O0" { { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } && { ! ia32 } } { "-O0" } { "" } } */
+/* { dg-skip-if "Reload target" { hppa*-*-* } } */

 #if defined __x86_64__
 #define ASM(s) asm (s)

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, John David Anglin wrote:
> The hppa target is a reload target and asm goto is not supported on reload targets.
> Skip failing tests on hppa.

IIUC the preferred term is "IRA target" or maybe "non-LRA
target", as opposed to "LRA target".  The tests fail for
cris-elf too, another IRA target, so I'd like to use that term
when adjusting the dg-skip-if, hope you don't mind.

But also, I'd like to xfail it instead for cris-elf, which adds
a caveat: people might then think a "reload target" is not the
same as an "IRA target", what with the different adjustments.

brgds, H-P

>
> Committed to master.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Skip asm goto tests on hppa*-*-*.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> 	PR testsuite/97987
> 	* gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c: Skip on hppa.
> 	* gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c: Likewise.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c
> index f1b30c02884..d2d2ac536bd 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c
> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
>  /* This test should be switched off for a new target with less than 4 allocatable registers */
>  /* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-skip-if "Reload target" { hppa*-*-* } } */
>  int
>  foo (void)
>  {
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c
> index 94c14dd4005..ce751ced90c 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
>  /* Test to generate output reload in asm goto on x86_64.  */
>  /* { dg-do compile } */
>  /* { dg-skip-if "no O0" { { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } && { ! ia32 } } { "-O0" } { "" } } */
> +/* { dg-skip-if "Reload target" { hppa*-*-* } } */
>
>  #if defined __x86_64__
>  #define ASM(s) asm (s)
>

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Andreas Schwab]

On Jan 18 2021, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, John David Anglin wrote:
>> The hppa target is a reload target and asm goto is not supported on reload targets.
>> Skip failing tests on hppa.
>
> IIUC the preferred term is "IRA target" or maybe "non-LRA
> target", as opposed to "LRA target".  The tests fail for
> cris-elf too, another IRA target, so I'd like to use that term
> when adjusting the dg-skip-if, hope you don't mind.

Perhaps there should be a target-supports test that rejects all current
non-lra targets.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510  2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:50:56PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, John David Anglin wrote:
> > The hppa target is a reload target and asm goto is not supported on reload targets.
> > Skip failing tests on hppa.
> 
> IIUC the preferred term is "IRA target" or maybe "non-LRA
> target", as opposed to "LRA target".  The tests fail for
> cris-elf too, another IRA target, so I'd like to use that term
> when adjusting the dg-skip-if, hope you don't mind.
> 
> But also, I'd like to xfail it instead for cris-elf, which adds
> a caveat: people might then think a "reload target" is not the
> same as an "IRA target", what with the different adjustments.

I think "IRA target" is not the right term, all targets are IRA targets,
but only some are using LRA and others use the old reload.

	Jakub

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:50:56PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, John David Anglin wrote:
> > > The hppa target is a reload target and asm goto is not supported on reload targets.
> > > Skip failing tests on hppa.
> >
> > IIUC the preferred term is "IRA target" or maybe "non-LRA
> > target", as opposed to "LRA target".  The tests fail for
> > cris-elf too, another IRA target, so I'd like to use that term
> > when adjusting the dg-skip-if, hope you don't mind.
> >
> > But also, I'd like to xfail it instead for cris-elf, which adds
> > a caveat: people might then think a "reload target" is not the
> > same as an "IRA target", what with the different adjustments.
>
> I think "IRA target" is not the right term, all targets are IRA targets,
> but only some are using LRA and others use the old reload.

But, IRA isn't used when...  Whatever; LRA and non-LRA then.
I'll call the suggested testsuite target-supports predicate
"lra" (thanks Andreas S.; of course!), to be used negated here.

brgds, H-P

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Richard Sandiford]

Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com> writes:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:50:56PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, John David Anglin wrote:
>> > > The hppa target is a reload target and asm goto is not supported on reload targets.
>> > > Skip failing tests on hppa.
>> >
>> > IIUC the preferred term is "IRA target" or maybe "non-LRA
>> > target", as opposed to "LRA target".  The tests fail for
>> > cris-elf too, another IRA target, so I'd like to use that term
>> > when adjusting the dg-skip-if, hope you don't mind.
>> >
>> > But also, I'd like to xfail it instead for cris-elf, which adds
>> > a caveat: people might then think a "reload target" is not the
>> > same as an "IRA target", what with the different adjustments.
>>
>> I think "IRA target" is not the right term, all targets are IRA targets,
>> but only some are using LRA and others use the old reload.
>
> But, IRA isn't used when...

Not sure what was elided here, but the choices are IRA+reload, IRA+LRA,
or no RA at all.

FWIW, Dave's “reload target” sounded fine to me.  It seems a bit more
precise than “non-LRA target”, which if taken literally would include
no-RA targets.

> Whatever; LRA and non-LRA then.
> I'll call the suggested testsuite target-supports predicate
> "lra" (thanks Andreas S.; of course!), to be used negated here.

Sounds good.

Thanks,
Richard

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Jeff Law]

On 1/19/21 5:36 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:50:56PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, John David Anglin wrote:
>>>> The hppa target is a reload target and asm goto is not supported on reload targets.
>>>> Skip failing tests on hppa.
>>> IIUC the preferred term is "IRA target" or maybe "non-LRA
>>> target", as opposed to "LRA target".  The tests fail for
>>> cris-elf too, another IRA target, so I'd like to use that term
>>> when adjusting the dg-skip-if, hope you don't mind.
>>>
>>> But also, I'd like to xfail it instead for cris-elf, which adds
>>> a caveat: people might then think a "reload target" is not the
>>> same as an "IRA target", what with the different adjustments.
>> I think "IRA target" is not the right term, all targets are IRA targets,
>> but only some are using LRA and others use the old reload.
> But, IRA isn't used when...  Whatever; LRA and non-LRA then.
> I'll call the suggested testsuite target-supports predicate
> "lra" (thanks Andreas S.; of course!), to be used negated here.
Well we could do that.  But instead I propose we drop reload for gcc-12
now that cc0 is dead (yea, yea, we need to get the avr conversion
reviewed first...)

Jeff

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 1/19/21 5:36 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > I'll call the suggested testsuite target-supports predicate
> > "lra" (thanks Andreas S.; of course!), to be used negated here.
> Well we could do that.? But instead I propose we drop reload for gcc-12
> now that cc0 is dead (yea, yea, we need to get the avr conversion
> reviewed first...)

How about a stage fixing the documentation for LRA first, to
enable a proper transition, rather than jumping directly to the
extinction threat?  There are still omissions to the point that
you have to check the code and LRA targets to get the correct
translation.  Like, what machine-description constructs are
dead, and what's their replacement.  Is reload_in_progress dead?

brgds, H-P

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Richard Sandiford wrote:

> Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com> writes:
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> I think "IRA target" is not the right term, all targets are IRA targets,
> >> but only some are using LRA and others use the old reload.
> >
> > But, IRA isn't used when...
>
> Not sure what was elided here,

...'when the that has made a transition and no longer has
transitional artefacts like "-mlra"' or something.  But, you say
it's not IRA that's replaced, but reload?  ...ah, that's it.

brgds, H-P

Re: [committed] Skip asm goto test fails on hppa

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> > Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com> writes:
> > > On Tue, 19 Jan 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >> I think "IRA target" is not the right term, all targets are IRA targets,
> > >> but only some are using LRA and others use the old reload.
> > >
> > > But, IRA isn't used when...
> >
> > Not sure what was elided here,
>
> ...'when the that has made a transition and no longer has
> transitional artefacts like "-mlra"'

FAOD: s/that/target/.  Bah.

brgds, H-P