On 26 September 2016 at 11:43, Matthew Wahab <matthew.wa...@foss.arm.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 25/09/16 14:00, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds the new intrinsics:
>>>>   vbsl_f16, vbslq_f16, vdup_n_f16, vdupq_n_f16, vdup_lane_f16,
>>>>   vdupq_lane_f16, vext_f16, vextq_f16, vmov_n_f16, vmovq_n_f16,
>>>>   vrev64_f16, vrev64q_f16, vtrn_f16, vtrnq_f16, vuzp_f16, vuzpq_f16,
>>>>   vzip_f16, vzipq_f16.
>>>>
>>>> This patch also updates the advsimd-intrinsics testsuite to test the f16
>>>> variants for ARM targets. These intrinsics are only implemented in the
>>>> ARM target so the tests are disabled for AArch64 using an extra
>>>> condition on a new convenience macro FP16_SUPPORTED. This patch also
>>>> disables, for the ARM target, the testsuite defined macro vdup_n_f16 as
>>>> it is no longer needed.
>>
>>
>> Since you committed this patch, I've noticed that libgcc fails to build
>> when GCC is configured:
>> --target arm-none-eabi and default cpu
>> /tmp/9649048_29.tmpdir/ccuBwQJJ.s: Assembler messages:
>> /tmp/9649048_29.tmpdir/ccuBwQJJ.s:64: Error: selected processor does
>> not support ARM mode `movwlt r0,32768'
>> /tmp/9649048_29.tmpdir/ccuBwQJJ.s:65: Error: selected processor does
>> not support ARM mode `movwge r0,32767'
>> make[4]: *** [_ssaddHQ.o] Error 1
>> make[4]: Leaving directory
>>
>> `/tmp/9649048_29.tmpdir/aci-gcc-fsf/builds/gcc-fsf-gccsrc/obj-arm-none-eabi/gcc1/arm-none-eabi/fpu/libgcc'
>>
>
>
> I can't reproduce the failure, could you send the configure arguments for
> the build.
>

If I'm not mistaken, that is:
 --target=arm-none-eabi  --disable-nls --disable-libgomp
--disable-libmudflap --disable-libcilkrts --enable-checking
--enable-languages=c,c++ --with-newlib

Maybe you've disabled multilibs?

> I've tried assembling the string 'movw r0, 32768' and get the error when
> -march=armv6kz or earlier. I suspect the new movhi and/or movhf patterns
> added earlier in the series need the architecture level added as a
> precondition but I'll need to look into it.
>
> Matthew

Thanks,

Christophe

Reply via email to