From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 100112 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2017 11:32:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 100073 invoked by uid 89); 26 Jun 2017 11:32:49 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-25.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_0,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: foss.arm.com Received: from foss.arm.com (HELO foss.arm.com) (217.140.101.70) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:32:48 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF0C32B; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 04:32:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.2.206.52] (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA4993F41F; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 04:32:45 -0700 (PDT) To: Kyrill Tkachov , Ramana Radhakrishnan , Richard Earnshaw , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" From: Thomas Preudhomme Subject: [PATCH, GCC/ARM, gcc-5-branch] Fix gcc.target/arm/fpscr.c Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:32:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------EDC861385820927CFBEA5511" X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg01916.txt.bz2 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------EDC861385820927CFBEA5511 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-length: 496 Hi, As raised by Christophe Lyon, fpscr.c FAILs because arm_fp_ok and arm_fp are not defined in GCC 5. This commit changes the test to use the same recipe as gcc.target/arm/cmp-2.c ChangeLog entry is as follows: *** gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog *** 2017-06-26 Thomas Preud'homme * gcc.target/arm/fpscr.c: Require arm_vfp_ok instead of arm_fp_ok and add -mfpu=vfp -mfloat-abi=softfp instead of fp_ok options. Ok for GCC 5? Best regards, Thomas --------------EDC861385820927CFBEA5511 Content-Type: text/x-patch; name="fix_fpscr_testcase_gcc5.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="fix_fpscr_testcase_gcc5.patch" Content-length: 640 diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/fpscr.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/fpscr.c index 7b4d71d72d8964f6da0d0604bf59aeb4a895df43..cafba4e8d67545bd210477230b9682fe86620e23 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/fpscr.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/fpscr.c @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ /* Test the fpscr builtins. */ /* { dg-do compile } */ -/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_fp_ok } */ +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_vfp_ok } */ /* { dg-skip-if "need fp instructions" { *-*-* } { "-mfloat-abi=soft" } { "" } } */ -/* { dg-add-options arm_fp } */ +/* { dg-options "-mfpu=vfp -mfloat-abi=softfp" } */ void test_fpscr () --------------EDC861385820927CFBEA5511--