[Bug testsuite/114320] New test case in r14-9439-g4aa87b856067d4 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114320 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nshead at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug testsuite/114320] New test case in r14-9439-g4aa87b856067d4 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114320 Nathaniel Shead changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Nathaniel Shead --- (In reply to Kewen Lin from comment #3) > (In reply to Nathaniel Shead from comment #2) > > Sorry about that. I've not been able to work out what configure flags I need > > to pass to cause this to error in the first place (I don't normally develop > > for powerpc and the machine I'm using doesn't seem to fail no matter what > > I guess the machine you are using (were referring to) isn't with powerpc > chip, cfarm provides some powerpc machines > (https://portal.cfarm.net/machines/list/), both ppc64le (LE -m64) and ppc64 > (BE -m32/-m64), it's recommended to leverage them for building/testing. :) > Thanks; I was actually using one of the cfarm machines (cfarm120 specifically), but on trying a different one I got the errors reported above, and confirmed that adding '-Wno-psabi' fixed them. > > flags I try), but am I correct in understanding that just adding > > "-Wno-psabi" to the tests should stop them from failing? If so I'm happy to > > push a patch to that effect. > > I think so, for now we don't have an effective target dedicated for __ibm128 > type but it's guarded the same as what's for __float128 type (it would be > relaxed though in future, even with that using ppc_float128_sw should just > be more strict). Ideally we can add one effective target powerpc_vsx_ok > (should be powerpc_vsx) to ensure VSX to be enabled, but considering we are > going to rework it in next release and we don't normally disable vsx > explicitly, this can be optional. Thanks, tested and committed as above. Should be fixed.
[Bug testsuite/114320] New test case in r14-9439-g4aa87b856067d4 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114320 --- Comment #4 from GCC Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6cb5ef37c2fac240b68d8ee438aba4885956269f commit r14-9517-g6cb5ef37c2fac240b68d8ee438aba4885956269f Author: Nathaniel Shead Date: Sat Mar 16 00:11:25 2024 +1100 testsuite: Fix excess errors for new modules testcases on powerpc [PR114320] On some configurations, PowerPC emits -Wpsabi warnings when using IEEE long doubles on a machine configured with IBM long double by default. This patch suppresses these warnings for this testcase. PR testsuite/114320 gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/modules/target-powerpc-1_a.C: Suppress -Wpsabi. * g++.dg/modules/target-powerpc-1_b.C: Likewise. Signed-off-by: Nathaniel Shead
[Bug testsuite/114320] New test case in r14-9439-g4aa87b856067d4 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114320 --- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin --- (In reply to Nathaniel Shead from comment #2) > Sorry about that. I've not been able to work out what configure flags I need > to pass to cause this to error in the first place (I don't normally develop > for powerpc and the machine I'm using doesn't seem to fail no matter what I guess the machine you are using (were referring to) isn't with powerpc chip, cfarm provides some powerpc machines (https://portal.cfarm.net/machines/list/), both ppc64le (LE -m64) and ppc64 (BE -m32/-m64), it's recommended to leverage them for building/testing. :) > flags I try), but am I correct in understanding that just adding > "-Wno-psabi" to the tests should stop them from failing? If so I'm happy to > push a patch to that effect. I think so, for now we don't have an effective target dedicated for __ibm128 type but it's guarded the same as what's for __float128 type (it would be relaxed though in future, even with that using ppc_float128_sw should just be more strict). Ideally we can add one effective target powerpc_vsx_ok (should be powerpc_vsx) to ensure VSX to be enabled, but considering we are going to rework it in next release and we don't normally disable vsx explicitly, this can be optional.
[Bug testsuite/114320] New test case in r14-9439-g4aa87b856067d4 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114320 --- Comment #2 from Nathaniel Shead --- Sorry about that. I've not been able to work out what configure flags I need to pass to cause this to error in the first place (I don't normally develop for powerpc and the machine I'm using doesn't seem to fail no matter what flags I try), but am I correct in understanding that just adding "-Wno-psabi" to the tests should stop them from failing? If so I'm happy to push a patch to that effect.
[Bug testsuite/114320] New test case in r14-9439-g4aa87b856067d4 fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114320 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2024-03-13 Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC||linkw at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Kewen Lin --- These new test cases require "-Wno-psabi" to suppress the warning.
