Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-04-28 Thread Jeff Law
On 04/27/2017 04:04 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: On 04/26/2017 01:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: I guess those should be decided case by case whether we want relative, absolute or saved line numbers. If the diagnostic is within the same function or code block as the stuff it is relative to, relative

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-04-28 Thread Tom de Vries
On 04/27/2017 10:43 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: On 04/26/2017 01:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 01:48:03PM +0200, Tom de Vries wrote: [ reposting with patch removed, was too big for gcc-patches@ ] I see in various tests you've ended up with ... { target ... } . } I think it

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-04-27 Thread Tom de Vries
On 04/26/2017 01:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: I guess those should be decided case by case whether we want relative, absolute or saved line numbers. If the diagnostic is within the same function or code block as the stuff it is relative to, relative is fine, but if e.g. the messages are just at

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-04-27 Thread Tom de Vries
On 04/26/2017 01:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 01:48:03PM +0200, Tom de Vries wrote: [ reposting with patch removed, was too big for gcc-patches@ ] I see in various tests you've ended up with ... { target ... } . } I think it would be better to just use ... { target ...

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-04-26 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 01:48:03PM +0200, Tom de Vries wrote: > [ reposting with patch removed, was too big for gcc-patches@ ] I see in various tests you've ended up with ... { target ... } . } I think it would be better to just use ... { target ... } } in that case, . is the default, and if

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-04-26 Thread Tom de Vries
[ reposting with patch removed, was too big for gcc-patches@ ] On 04/26/2017 01:33 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: On 03/27/2017 03:11 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: On 24/03/17 18:13, Mike Stump wrote: On Mar 24, 2017, at 5:58 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: - { /* { dg-warning

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-28 Thread Tom de Vries
On 28/03/17 10:23, Thomas Schwinge wrote: Hi! On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:46:19 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for excess errors" FAILs due to: ... sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca. ... This

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-28 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi! On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:46:19 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for > excess errors" FAILs due to: > ... > sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca. > ... > > This patch marks those testcases as

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-27 Thread Tom de Vries
On 24/03/17 18:13, Mike Stump wrote: On Mar 24, 2017, at 5:58 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: - { /* { dg-warning "statement may fall through" "" { target c } 23 } */ - int a[i]; /* { dg-warning "statement may fall through" "" { target c++ } 24 } */ + {

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-27 Thread Tom de Vries
On 24/03/17 13:38, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Tom, On 23/03/17 18:25, Mike Stump wrote: On Mar 23, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for excess errors" FAILs due to: ... sorry, unimplemented: target

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-24 Thread Mike Stump
On Mar 24, 2017, at 5:58 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > - { /* { dg-warning "statement may fall through" "" { target c } 23 } */ > - int a[i]; /* { dg-warning "statement may fall through" "" { target c++ > } 24 } */ > + { /* { dg-warning "statement may fall

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-24 Thread Rainer Orth
Hi Richard, >> Similar >> >> -m64 >> FAIL: gcc.dg/Walloca-2.c note (test for warnings, line 38) >> FAIL: gcc.dg/Wvla-larger-than-2.c note (test for warnings, line 25) >> >> -m32 >> FAIL: gcc.dg/Walloca-1.c (test for warnings, line 26) >> FAIL: gcc.dg/Walloca-1.c (test for excess errors) >> FAIL:

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-24 Thread Rainer Orth
Hi Richard, > Similar > > -m64 > FAIL: gcc.dg/Walloca-2.c note (test for warnings, line 38) > FAIL: gcc.dg/Wvla-larger-than-2.c note (test for warnings, line 25) > > -m32 > FAIL: gcc.dg/Walloca-1.c (test for warnings, line 26) > FAIL: gcc.dg/Walloca-1.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL:

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-24 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Hi Tom, > >> On 23/03/17 18:25, Mike Stump wrote: >>> On Mar 23, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-24 Thread Rainer Orth
Hi Tom, > On 23/03/17 18:25, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Mar 23, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: >>> >>> I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for >>> excess errors" FAILs due to: >>> ... >>> sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-24 Thread Tom de Vries
On 23/03/17 18:25, Mike Stump wrote: On Mar 23, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for excess errors" FAILs due to: ... sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca. We'd encourage ports to

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-23 Thread Mike Stump
On Mar 23, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: > > I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for > excess errors" FAILs due to: > ... > sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca. We'd encourage ports to support alloca. :-) > OK for

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-23 Thread Tom de Vries
On 23/03/17 17:24, Thomas Schwinge wrote: Hi Tom! On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:46:19 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for excess errors" FAILs due to: ... sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca. ...

Re: [testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-23 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hi Tom! On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 16:46:19 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for > excess errors" FAILs due to: > ... > sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca. > ... > > This patch marks those

[testsuite] Add missing dg-require-effective-target alloca to gcc testsuite

2017-03-23 Thread Tom de Vries
Hi, I've run the gcc testsuite for target nvptx-none and ran into "test for excess errors" FAILs due to: ... sorry, unimplemented: target cannot support alloca. ... This patch marks those testcases as requiring alloca. OK for trunk for stage1? Thanks, - Tom 2017-03-23 Tom de Vries