public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexandre Oliva <oliva@adacore.com>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: nathan@acm.org
Subject: Re: C++ modules and AAPCS/ARM EABI clash on inline key methods
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2022 01:53:50 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <orbkxgnna9.fsf@lxoliva.fsfla.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <orsfqy7f16.fsf@lxoliva.fsfla.org> (Alexandre Oliva's message of "Thu, 31 Mar 2022 04:32:53 -0300")

On Mar 31, 2022, Alexandre Oliva <oliva@adacore.com> wrote:

> g++.dg/modules/virt-2_a.C fails on arm-eabi and many other arm targets
> that use the AAPCS variant.  ARM is the only target that overrides
> TARGET_CXX_KEY_METHOD_MAY_BE_INLINE.  It's not clear to me which way the
> clash between AAPCS and C++ Modules design should be resolved, but
> currently it favors AAPCS and thus the test fails.

> Should we skip the test on ARM, XFAIL it, or put in some kludge like
> the patchlet below?

That kludge doesn't work: subsequent virt tests fail with it, on arm.

Would something like this be acceptable/desirable?  It's overreaching,
in that not all arm platforms are expected to fail, but the result on
them will be an unexpected pass, which is not quite as bad as the
unexpected fail we get on most arm variants now.


diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/virt-2_a.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/virt-2_a.C
index 9115cc19cc286..0b780645708ba 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/virt-2_a.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/modules/virt-2_a.C
@@ -22,6 +22,6 @@ export int Visit (Visitor *v)
 }
 
 // Emit here
-// { dg-final { scan-assembler {_ZTV7Visitor:} } }
-// { dg-final { scan-assembler {_ZTI7Visitor:} } }
-// { dg-final { scan-assembler {_ZTS7Visitor:} } }
+// { dg-final { scan-assembler {_ZTV7Visitor:} { xfail arm*-*-* } } }
+// { dg-final { scan-assembler {_ZTI7Visitor:} { xfail arm*-*-* } } }
+// { dg-final { scan-assembler {_ZTS7Visitor:} { xfail arm*-*-* } } }


-- 
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker                https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
   Free Software Activist                       GNU Toolchain Engineer
Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice
but very few check the facts.  Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-05  4:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-31  7:32 Alexandre Oliva
2022-04-05  4:53 ` Alexandre Oliva [this message]
2023-02-17  6:09   ` Alexandre Oliva
2023-02-21 16:31     ` Richard Earnshaw
2023-02-21 16:48       ` Richard Earnshaw
2023-02-22 19:57         ` Alexandre Oliva
2023-02-23 10:14           ` Richard Earnshaw
2023-02-23 17:12             ` Alexandre Oliva
2023-02-23 21:20               ` Alexandre Oliva
2023-02-24 10:23                 ` Richard Earnshaw
2023-02-24 10:30                   ` Iain Sandoe
2023-02-24 14:39                   ` Alexandre Oliva
2023-02-21 22:27       ` Nathan Sidwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=orbkxgnna9.fsf@lxoliva.fsfla.org \
    --to=oliva@adacore.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nathan@acm.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).