> On Nov 4, 2020, at 1:00 PM, Segher Boessenkool <seg...@kernel.crashing.org>
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 01:20:58PM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Tobias Burnus <tob...@codesourcery.com> writes:
>>> Three of the testcases fail on PowerPC:
>>> gcc.target/i386/zero-scratch-regs-{9,10,11}.c
>>> powerpc64le-linux-gnu/default/gcc.d/zero-scratch-regs-10.c:77:1: sorry,
>>> unimplemented: '-fzero-call-used_regs' not supported on this target
>>>
>>> Did you miss some dg-require-effective-target ?
>>
>> No, these are a signal to target maintainers that they need
>> to decide whether to add support or accept the status quo
>> (in which case a new effective-target will be needed). See:
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/557595.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!PD1t9rpXf7lNS8yVbiQckiR5w3bv1eqGZenzRGPMBTAlYpshdQ9qVR0JLhoeNFMg$
>> :
>>
>> The new tests are likely to fail on some targets with the sorry()
>> message, but I think target maintainers are best placed to decide
>> whether (a) that's a fundamental restriction of the target and the
>> tests should just be skipped or (b) the target needs to implement
>> the new hook.
>
> But why are tests in gcc.target/i386/ run for other targets at all?!
No, tests in gcc.target/i386 should not run for PowerPC.
What Tobias Burnus mentioned are the following tests:
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-gcc.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-10.c
-Wc++-compat (test for excess errors)
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-gcc.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-11.c
-Wc++-compat (test for excess errors)
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-gcc.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-9.c
-Wc++-compat (test for excess errors)
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-g++.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-10.c
-std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-g++.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-10.c
-std=gnu++14 (test for excess errors)
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-g++.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-10.c
-std=gnu++17 (test for excess errors)
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-g++.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-10.c
-std=gnu++2a (test for excess errors)
powerpc64le-linux-gnu-g++.sum:FAIL: c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-11.c
-std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
They are under c-c++-common, not gcc.target/i386.
These testing cases are added intentionaly on all platforms in order to check
whether the current middle-end default implementation for
-fzero-call-used-regs works on the specific platform.
If the default implementation doesn’t work for the specific platform, for
example, on PowerPC, it’s better for the Maintainer of PowerPC to decide
Whether to skip these testing case on this platform or add a PowerPC
implementation.
Qing
>
>
> Segher
