Re: [PATCH][ARM] Updating testcase unsigned-extend-2.c

2016-12-21 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
Hi Andre, On 21/06/16 15:16, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: Hello, After some changes to GCC this test no longer tests the desired code generation behavior. The generated assembly is better than it used to be, but it has become too smart. I add an extra parameter to make sure GCC can't optimize aw

[Ping 2][PATCH][ARM] Updating testcase unsigned-extend-2.c

2016-12-21 Thread Andre Vieira (lists)
On 12/12/16 14:20, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 21/06/16 15:16, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> Hello, >> >> After some changes to GCC this test no longer tests the desired code >> generation behavior. The generated assembly is better than it used to >> be, but it has become too smart. I add an

[Ping][PATCH][ARM] Updating testcase unsigned-extend-2.c

2016-12-12 Thread Andre Vieira (lists)
On 21/06/16 15:16, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hello, > > After some changes to GCC this test no longer tests the desired code > generation behavior. The generated assembly is better than it used to > be, but it has become too smart. I add an extra parameter to make sure > GCC can't optimize awa

[PATCH][ARM] Updating testcase unsigned-extend-2.c

2016-06-21 Thread Andre Vieira (lists)
Hello, After some changes to GCC this test no longer tests the desired code generation behavior. The generated assembly is better than it used to be, but it has become too smart. I add an extra parameter to make sure GCC can't optimize away the loop. Tested for arm-none-eabi-gcc with a Cortex-M3