Re: [PATCH] Fix PR60930

[Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1136 bytes --]

On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 09:20:50PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > >	PR tree-optimization/60930
> > >	* gcc.dg/torture/pr60930.c:  New test.
> > Doesn't the test depend on long long being at least 64 bits?
> 
> But that is guaranteed by C99, isn't it?

But the testcase isn't built with -std=c99.

> 5.2.4.2.1 says:
> 
> ... Their implementation-defined values shall be equal or greater in magnitude
> (absolute value) to those shown, with the same sign.
> ...
> - maximum value for an object of type unsigned long long int ULLONG_MAX
>   18446744073709551615 // 2 64 − 1
> > 
> > What we've done for these kinds of tests in the past is:
> > 
> > if (sizeof (whatever) < needed size)
> >   exit (0);
> > 
> > Another approach would be to use an effective target test and skip
> > the test if the target doesn't have a suitable long long.  Look  in
> > testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp for the various target
> 
> If it was some other type, sure, one could use int32plus, lp64, etc.
> target, or #if __SIZEOF_type__ == ...

I suggest the latter (#if).

Ok with that change.

Thanks,
Richard.