On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
<senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:03:43AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> > On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:44 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
>> > <senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com> wrote:
>> >> What is right way to fix these? I saw one testcase that did
>> >>
>> >> typedef int int32_t __attribute__ ((__mode__ (__SI__)));
>> >>
>> >> Is this the right way to go?
>> >
>> > I like this. Pre-approved.
>>
>> We also have
>>
>> /* { dg-require-effective-target int32plus } */
>>
>> which is used throughout the testsuite in some cases.
>
> Wouldn't that prevent the tests from running for non 32 bit int targets?
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, the tree-ssa tests
> don't really depend on ints to be 32 bits - it's just an incorrect
> assumption?
The test scanning for * 4 would not be fixed with int32plus indeed (if
int is larger than 32bits). Using int32_t would be better than
SImode as SImode is not guaranteed to be 32bits either.
Richard.
> Regards
> Senthil
