Hi,
on 2024/4/28 16:20, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2024, "Kewen.Lin" <li...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> This patch seemed to miss to CC gcc-patches list. :)
>
> Oops, sorry, thanks for catching that.
>
> Here it is. FTR, you've already responded suggesting an apparent
> preference for addressing PR105359, but since I meant to contribute it,
> I'm reposting is to gcc-patches, now with a reference to the PR.
OK, from this perspective IMHO it seems more clear to adopt xfail
with effective target long_double_64bit?
BR,
Kewen
>
>
> ppc: testsuite: pr79004 needs -mlong-double-128
>
> Some of the asm opcodes expected by pr79004 depend on
> -mlong-double-128 to be output. E.g., without this flag, the
> conditions of patterns @extenddf<mode>2 and extendsf<mode>2 do not
> hold, and so GCC resorts to libcalls instead of even trying
> rs6000_expand_float128_convert.
>
> Perhaps the conditions are too strict, and they could enable the use
> of conversion insns involving __ieee128/_Float128 even with 64-bit
> long doubles. Alas, for now, we need this flag for the test to pass
> on target variants that use 64-bit long doubles.
>
>
> for gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> * gcc.target/powerpr/pr79004.c: Add -mlong-double-128.
> ---
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c
> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c
> index e411702dc98a9..061a0e83fe2ad 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
> /* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-* && lp64 } } } */
> /* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_p9vector_ok } */
> -/* { dg-options "-mdejagnu-cpu=power9 -O2 -mfloat128" } */
> +/* { dg-options "-mdejagnu-cpu=power9 -O2 -mfloat128 -mlong-double-128" } */
> /* { dg-prune-output ".-mfloat128. option may not be fully supported" } */
>
> #include <math.h>
>
>
