>>> There is a microblaze cpu version 10.0 included in versal. If the
>>> minor version is only a single digit, then the version comparison
>>> will fail as version 10.0 will appear as 100 compared to version
>>> 6.00 or 8.30 which will calculate to values 600 and 830.
>>> The issue can be seen when using the '-mcpu=10.0' option.
>>> With this fix, versions with a single digit minor number such as
>>> 10.0 will be calculated as greater than versions with a smaller
>>> major version number, but with two minor version digits.
>>> By applying this fix, several incorrect warning messages will no
>>> longer be printed when building the versal plm application, such as
>>> the warning message below:
>>> warning: '-mxl-multiply-high' can be used only with '-mcpu=v6.00.a'
>>> or greater
>>> Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.fra...@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> gcc/config/microblaze/microblaze.cc | 164 +++++++++++++---------------
>>> 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-)
>>
>> Please add a test case.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Eager
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Would you mind helping me understand how to make a gcc test case for this
> patch?
>
> This patch does not change the resulting binaries of a microblaze gcc build.
> The output will be the same with our without the patch, so I do not having
> anything in the binary itself to verify.
>
> All that happens is false warning messages will not be printed when building
> with ‘-mcpu=10.0’. Is there a way to test for warning messages?
>
> In any case, please do not commit v1 of this patch. I am going to work on
> making a v2 based on Mark’s feedback.
> You can create a test case which passes the -mcpu=10.0 and other options to
> GCC and verify that the message is not generated after the patch is applied.
> You can make all GCC warnings into errors with the "-Werror" option.
> This means that the compile will fail if the warning is issued.
> Take a look at gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/bti-1.c for an example of
> using { dg-options "<opt>" } to specify command line options.
> There is a test suite option (dg-warning) which checks that a particular
> source line generates a warning message, but it isn't clear whether is is
> possible to check that a warning is not issued.
Hi Michael,
Thanks to Mark Hatle's feedback, we have a much simpler solution to the problem.
The following change is actually all that is necessary. Since we are just
moving from
strcasecmp to strverscmp, does v2 of the patch need to have a test case to go
with it?
-#define MICROBLAZE_VERSION_COMPARE(VA,VB) strcasecmp (VA, VB)
+#define MICROBLAZE_VERSION_COMPARE(VA,VB) strverscmp (VA, VB)
I assume there are already test cases that verify that strverscmp works
correctly?
Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD
