On 09/25/2014 04:48 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 09/25/2014 02:04 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
While doing some arm-none-eabi testing, I noticed that a bunch of
gcc.dg/vect tests were causing the target to hang from trying to execute
code compiled with -mfpu=neon -mfloat-abi=softfp, on a
with several sets of multilib options for arm-none-eabi and
arm-none-linux-gnueabi. OK?
Janis
P.S. I don't know why, but the original thumb tests require arm_eabi
and the arm tests don't; I kept that restraint.
2012-12-21 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/arm/ftest-support.h
that
pass a command through additional levels of procedure calls, this
patch lets it catch the error so that it can fail gracefully and the
tests will be reported as UNSUPPORTED. This will skip the tests for
a relatively small number of test setups.
OK for trunk?
Janis
2013-01-03 Janis Johnson
Richard,
Back in September I submitted a patch to fix five ARM tests in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg01515.html.
You responded in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg00972.html
and I answered your questions in a reply.
The first of the modified tests doesn't need to
Richard,
In December I submitted a patch to replace ftest*.c in gcc.target/arm with
compile-only tests: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-12/msg01339.html.
There has been no response to the patch.
One reason for the replacement is that the arch_v*_multilib effective target
checks don't do
The options specified for gcc.target/arm/fma.c and fma-sp.c can conflict
with several multilib options. This patch skips the tests for multilibs
with conflicting options, and it adds option -mfloat-abi=hard which is
needed for the test.
OK for trunk?
Janis
2013-01-14 Janis Johnson jani
Test gcc.target/arm/neon-vld1_dupQ.c started failing with r194594, a C
front end change that causes the test to get warnings. The test passes
local variables of type int64x1_t to functions declared with arguments
of type int64_t. This patch casts the values passed to those arguments.
It's
multilibs; OK for trunk?
Janis
2013-01-15 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
PR testsuite/54622
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_vect_perm_byte,
check_effective_target_vect_perm_short,
check_effective_target_vect_widen_mult_qi_to_hi_pattern
On 01/14/2013 03:04 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Test gcc.target/arm/neon-vld1_dupQ.c started failing with r194594, a C
front end change that causes the test to get warnings. The test passes
local variables of type int64x1_t to functions declared with arguments
of type int64_t. This patch casts
2013-01-15 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
PR testsuite/55994
* gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/builtins.exp: Add
-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition for eabi and elf targets.
Index: testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/builtins.exp
On 01/15/2013 09:24 AM, David Blaikie wrote:
For some reason KFAILs weren't being summarized by
dg-extract-results.sh. I assume this was just an oversight, so here's
a patch to add it alongside all the other result types.
I encountered this in the GDB test suite but was asked to submit the
On 01/15/2013 09:16 AM, David Blaikie wrote:
now with an actual GCC patch, instead of the GDB one - sorry about that.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:31 AM, David Blaikie dblai...@gmail.com wrote:
The regex to detect the beginning of a test file execution was too
broad, matching any line
Execution of test gcc.dg/webizer.c fails with a segfault for
powerpc-eabi with the GNU simulator. The test has an array of size 2
and accesses that array with indices of 1 and 2. This patch fixes the
bounds of the loop index.
Tested on powerpc-none-eabi; OK for trunk?
Janis
2013-01-15 Janis
On 01/15/2013 02:01 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/15/2013 02:57 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Execution of test gcc.dg/webizer.c fails with a segfault for
powerpc-eabi with the GNU simulator. The test has an array of size 2
and accesses that array with indices of 1 and 2. This patch fixes the
bounds
of the others.
I don't know why some of the tests required arm_eabi, but I can't see
any reason for it being necessary for this version of the tests so I've
dropped it.
OK?
Janis
2013-01-16 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/arm/ftest-support.h: Replace for compile-only tests
values for -march, with and without -mthumb as appropriate for the
arch. The ones that are now skipped are the ones that used to fail
with complaints from the compiler.
Is this OK?
Janis
2013-01-16 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/arm/pr40887.c: Require at least armv5
On 01/16/2013 06:05 PM, Joey Ye wrote:
Test cases for previous patch no lr save for non-far branches in leaf
function.
* gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-1.c: New.
* gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-2.c: New.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/thumb1-far-jump-2.c
this particular test because I want to add an xfail but want to
keep that change separate from the cleanup.
Janis
2013-01-18 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-12.c: Refactor dg-final directive.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-12.c
For primarily selfish reasons I'd like to backport several testsuite
fixes from mainline to the 4.7 branch. Should I request permission for
specific groups of changes, or just do it?
Janis
On 01/23/2013 02:52 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Test gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes uses Tcl conditions within a dg-final
directive, which is something that DejaGnu handles but we strive not to
do. It's now possible to use supported constructs to get the same
result, so I've cleaned up the test and
On 01/23/2013 04:57 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Would you mind playing around with it a bit, like removing the xfail from
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times vectorized 1 loops 1 vect { target
sparc*-*-* xfail ilp32 } } } */ and removing/disabling the directives with
sparc*-*-*?
I already
This patch fixes the typo reported in PR testsuite/56206. Checked in as
obvious.
Janis
2013-02-04 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
PR testsuite/56206
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_arm_hard_vfp_ok):
Fix typo.
Index: testsuite/lib/target
On 02/14/2013 10:02 AM, Tilman Sauerbeck wrote:
Hi,
here's a patch that adds a testcase for PR 55987.
Is xfail the right thing to use here? I went with that since I guess the
PR won't be fixed anytime soon ;)
I haven't assigned copyright to the FSF -- is this patch small enough to
go in
On 02/13/2013 06:39 AM, Greta Yorsh wrote:
The tests gcc.target/arm/interrupt-*.c are for ARM mode only.
This patch uses effective target arm_notthumb instead of __thumb_ predefine,
removes unreachable code, and fixes typos.
Ok for trunk?
OK
Janis
Thanks,
Greta
ChangeLog
currently in the
hands of the FSF) but this patch is small enough to not require one. If
this is OK someone else will need to appy it.
2011-04-08 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/arm/sync-1.c: Limit to sync_int_long, do not use
-march option.
Index: gcc/testsuite
On 04/08/2011 04:37 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Apr 8, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Test gcc.target/arm/pr43698.c specifies -march=armv7-a and fails
execution for multilibs whose hardware or simulator doesn't support that
architecture.
Ideally, I'd like target people to weigh
Patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-12/msg00625.html was
approved by Jason last December but I never got around to checking
it in. Paolo Carlini said in PR44473 that it was already approved
and doesn't need a new approval, so I checked it in after a
bootstrap and regtest of c,c++ for
Test gcc.dg/graphite/id-pr46845.c turns off warnings for x86 targets.
powerpc targets warn about ABI issues with vector arguments for this
test, so this patch includes powerpc*-*-* in the list of targets to
turn off warnings. OK for trunk?
2011-10-07 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
for either __NO_FPRS__ or _SOFT_FLOAT being defined.
Is this OK for trunk? I must admit that I'm not sure what all those
Power float variants are for.
2011-10-10 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
gcc/testsuite/
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_hard_float
On 10/10/2011 02:13 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 11:40 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 10:37 -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
Patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-12/msg00625.html was
approved by Jason last December but I never got around to checking
This patch skips several Power-specific tests if hard_float support
isn't available. OK for trunk?
2011-10-10 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fma-3.c: Require hard_float.
* gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-fma-4.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/powerpc
On 10/10/2011 06:23 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011, Janis Johnson wrote:
This patch skips several Power-specific tests if hard_float support
isn't available. OK for trunk?
It looks like these are testing for particular instructions using FPRs and
so powerpc_fprs is more
On 10/10/2011 01:19 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Tests gcc.target/powerpc/warn-[12].c fail for soft-float multilibs with
the unexpected warning -mvsx requires hardware floating point [enabled
by default]. This patch skips those tests for soft-float multilibs and
modifies the powerpc check
but have tested this patch with CodeSourcery's GCC 4.6. OK for trunk?
2011-10-12 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/arm/pr48252.c: Require arm_little_endian.
* gcc.target/arm/neon-vset_lanes8.c: Likewise.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr48252.c
?
Janis
2012-04-25 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.dg/bf-ms-layout.c: Adjust offsets to fit ms-bitfield
structure layout.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/bf-ms-layout.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg
see anything problematic, but it's possible I missed something
and errors will be reported. Checked in on mainline, and I plan to add
it to 4.7 soon.
Janis
2012-07-24 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/gcc-dg.exp (process-message): Don't ignore errors.
Index: testsuite/lib
some feedback before checking this in so I'll wait at least a
couple of days. I plan to put it on the 4.7 branch also.
Janis
2012-07-24 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
doc/sourcebuild.texi (Selectors): Document the use of target
and xfail used together.
testsuite
On 07/20/2012 05:23 AM, Anna Tikhonova wrote:
Hi all,
I've fixed test which was failing on Android NDK
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2012-07-20 Anna Tikhonova anna.m.tikhon...@gmail.com
* gcc.dg/20020201-1.c: Include stdlib.h.
Patch attached.
Ok for trunk 4.7?
OK if you
.
Checked in on mainline, coming soon to 4.7.
Janis
2012-07-25 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nullptr21.c: Remove printfs, make self-checking.
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/nullptr21.C
===
--- gcc
On 07/26/2012 10:16 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
No test case because I couldn't figure out how to test for a
warning with no line number.
Try using line number 0.
Janis
, coming soon to the 4.7 branch.
Janis
2012-07-26 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.dg/pr45259.c: Only -fpic depends on fpic support.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr45259.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr45259.c
On 07/27/2012 01:06 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
Hi Janis,
On 07/26/2012 10:16 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
No test case because I couldn't figure out how to test for a
warning with no line number.
Try using line number 0.
That didn't work for me. Using
! { dg-do compile }
! { dg-options
On 08/01/2012 07:29 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 08/01/2012 12:46 AM, Peter Bergner wrote:
I'd like to ping the following libstdc++ DFP patch that fixes PR54036:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-07/msg00959.html
I think the patch is essentially Ok, but I would recommend giving
? Since current ndk
is based on 4.6
2012/7/25 Janis Johnson janis_john...@mentor.com:
On 07/25/2012 03:58 AM, Anna Tikhonova wrote:
Thanks!
I've removed declarations. New patch attached.
You're not listed as write after approval in the MAINTAINERS
file; would you like me to check
On 08/08/2012 03:27 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:25 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:36 AM, William J. Schmidt
wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
Greetings,
Thanks for the review of part 2! Here's another chunk of the SLSR code
(I feel I
On 08/08/2012 06:41 PM, William J. Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 15:35 -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
On 08/08/2012 03:27 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:25 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:36 AM, William J. Schmidt
wschm
On 08/09/2012 06:46 PM, William J. Schmidt wrote:
As suggested by Janis regarding testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/slsr-30.c,
this patch adds a new effective target for machines having long and int
of differing sizes.
Tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu, where the test passes for -m64
and is
On 08/23/2012 08:05 PM, Joey Ye wrote:
Ssa-dom-thread-3.c has following code to trigger a warning on ARM. Add
-fno-short-enums to suppress it.
struct tree_base
{
enum tree_code code:16;
};
OK to trunk and 4.7?
OK.
Janis
2012-08-15 Joey Ye joey...@arm.com
*
On 08/27/2012 08:02 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
[ Richard, sorry for the duplicate message where I omitted the mailing-list]
On 24 August 2012 10:40, Richard Earnshaw rearn...@arm.com wrote:
Has this been tested for big-endian?
Hi,
While improving my tests and trying to turn them into
On 08/31/2012 05:05 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi,
Tests gcc.target/arm/pr48252.c, gcc.target/arm/pr51835.c and
gcc.target/arm/neon-vset_lanes8.c currently expect little-endian code
and fail when compiled/executed in big-endian mode.
The attached patch fixes them.
Tested with qemu on
On 06/29/2011 06:25 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 23/06/11 22:38, Janis Johnson wrote:
Tests wmul-[1234].c and mla-2.c in gcc.target/arm require support that
the arm backend identifies as TARGET_DSP_MULTIPLY. The tests all
specify a -march option with that support, but it is overridden
Thumb-2, with support for new effective target arm_thumb2.
Changes to the comment for arm_thumb1 support clarify the difference
between it and arm_thumb1_ok.
OK for trunk, and for 4.6 in a few days if no problems?
2011-07-06 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/target-supports.exp
but the
default.
OK for trunk, and for 4.6 after a few days?
2011-07-06 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/arm/pr41679.c: Remove -march options and unneeded
dg-prune-output.
* gcc.target/arm/pr46883.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/arm/xor-and.c: Likewise
-06 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.target/arm/pr39839.c: Remove -march option and unneeded
dg-prune-output.
* gcc.target/arm/pr40657-2.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/arm/pr40956.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target/arm/pr42235.c: Likewise.
* gcc.target
On 07/07/2011 09:14 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 07/07/11 00:26, Janis Johnson wrote:
Index: gcc.target/arm/pr41679.c
I think this should just be moved to gcc.c-torture/compile. There
doesn't seem to be anything processor-specific here.
Index: gcc.target/arm/pr46883.c
Likewise.
OK
On 07/07/2011 09:48 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 07/07/11 17:30, Janis Johnson wrote:
On 07/07/2011 09:14 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 07/07/11 00:26, Janis Johnson wrote:
Index: gcc.target/arm/xor-and.c
===
--- gcc.target
On 07/14/2011 07:16 AM, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
{ dg-options -O2 -march=armv7-a }
The tests use { dg-options -O2 -march=armv7-a } but -march will be
overridden for multilibs that specify -march, and might conflict with
other multilib options. If you really need that particular -march value
then
On 07/18/2011 05:19 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 18/07/11 12:09, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
PR43597 was fixed by
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revisionrevision=172032.
This patch adds a testcase.
OK for trunk?
Thanks,
- Tom
2011-07-18 Tom de Vries t...@codesourcery.com
PR
the remaining stackalign tests to use torture test
support to combine the stack align options with other torture options so
they'll show up in test summary lines, eliminating lots of duplicate
lines in test summaries.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu and arm-none-eabi. OK for mainline?
2012-06-11 Janis Johnson
On 06/11/2012 12:15 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Janis Johnson
janis_john...@mentor.com wrote:
The tests in gcc.dg/torture/stackalign use two sets of torture options:
the usual optimization sets used as default for torture tests, and up to
four sets of options
On 06/11/2012 12:35 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Janis Johnson
janis_john...@mentor.com wrote:
On 06/11/2012 12:15 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Janis Johnson
janis_john...@mentor.com wrote:
The tests in gcc.dg/torture/stackalign use two sets
On 06/11/2012 12:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Janis Johnson
janis_john...@mentor.com wrote:
On 06/11/2012 12:35 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Janis Johnson
janis_john...@mentor.com wrote:
On 06/11/2012 12:15 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 11
Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.dg/cpp/include2a.c: Add comments to checks for multiple
messages reported for one line of source code.
* gcc.dg/cpp/pr30786.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/cpp/pr28709.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/cpp/missing-header-MD.c: Likewise
2012-06-11 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* c-c++-common/raw-string-3.c: Add comments to checks for multiple
messages reported for for one line of source code.
* c-c++-common/raw-string-5.c: Likewise.
* c-c++-common/raw-string-4.c: Likewise.
* c-c
for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-11 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.dg/20031223-1.c: Add comments to check for multiple
messages reported for one line of source code.
* gcc.dg/Wconversion-integer.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/Wfatal-2.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg
Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.c-torture/compile/sync-1.c: Add comments to checks for multiple
messages reported for one line of source code.
Index: gcc.c-torture/compile/sync-1.c
===
--- gcc.c-torture
This test modifies dg-message test directives by adding comments that
will be added to lines in the test summary to eliminate non-unique lines
for checks of messages for the same line of source code in a test.
Tested on arm-none-eabi. OK for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-11 Janis Johnson jani
use
dg-additional-options instead to append to, rather than replace, the
default flags.
H.J., I'm pretty sure this now does what you want for the seven tests
that specify different options.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu and arm-none-eabi. OK for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-11 Janis Johnson jani
This patch modifies miscellaneous tests in gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg to
specify comments in dg-message/dg-warning/dg-error test directives for
checks for multiple messages for the same line of source code.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-13 Janis Johnson jani
-gnu and arm-none-eabi. OK for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-13 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/scandump.exp (scan-dump-times): Use printable version of
regexp in test summary line.
Index: lib/scandump.exp
and the rest of the summary line to make it slightly more
readable.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu and arm-none-eabi. OK for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-13 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/scanasm.exp (scan-assembler, scan-assembler-not, scan-hidden,
scan-not-hiddent, scan-file
a comment.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu and arm-none-eabi. OK for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-13 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/dg-pch.exp (dg-flags-pch): Add flags to make compile lines in
test summary unique.
Index: lib/dg-pch.exp
On 06/13/2012 02:37 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, Janis Johnson wrote:
PCH test infrastructure compiles each test twice, with identical results
in the test summary file (assuming they both pass or both fail). This
patch adds an extra flag to each compile, -Dcompile1
-none-eabi, checked in.
Janis
2012-06-15 Janis Johnson jano...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C: Add comments to checks for multiple
messages reported for one line of source code.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-decl.C: Likewise.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype2.C: Likewise
different from
the patch for C tests I'm not waiting for a review.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu and arm-none-eabi, checked in.
Janis
2012-06-15 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/torture/stackalign/stackalign.exp: Combine stack
alignment torture options with usual torture
-linux-gnu and arm-eabi for gcc and g++ GCOV tests.
OK for mainline?
Janis
2012-06-15 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/gcov.exp (verify-lines, verify-branches, verify-calls): Use
testname that includes flags, passed in as new argument, in
pass/fail messages
On 06/15/2012 12:32 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jun 15, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
GCOV tests for C++ are run for both std=gnu++98 and std=gnu++11. Those
options are not reported by GCOV-specific lines in the test summary,
OK for mainline?
Ok.
It is scary that upvar is ever
On 06/17/2012 05:03 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
The testcase still fails on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with:
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp68.c scan-tree-dump-times vrp1 link_error 1
since there are two calls to link_error.
?
Janis
2012-06-18 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/profopt.exp: Make prof_option_list local to profopt-execute.
* g++.dg/tree-prof/tree-prof.exp (PROFOPT_OPTIONS): Define after
including profopt.opt; save and restore existing value.
* g++.dg/bprob
for name in dg-test to a new proc
which saves its value for further uses in the same test, with an extra
space at the end if there are torture options.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu for gcc and g++. OK for trunk?
Janis
2012-06-25 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/target-supports
is with patterns that include newlines, to keep the pattern all on the
same line in the test summary.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu for gcc and g++. OK for trunk?
Janis
2012-06-26 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* lib/scandump.exp (scan-dump, scan-dump-not, scan-dump-dem,
scan-dump-dem
from
someone else; OK for trunk?
Janis
2012-06-27 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-50.c: Combine two scans.
Index: gcc.dg/vect/vect-50.c
===
--- gcc.dg/vect/vect-50.c (revision 189025
On 06/27/2012 05:05 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jun 27, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
These scans from gcc.dg/vect/vect-50.c, and others similar to them in
other vect tests, hurt my brain:
/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times Vectorizing an unaligned access 2
vect { xfail
-message directives to make their
messages unique in the test summary.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu; OK for trunk?
Janis
2012-06-28 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* gcc.dg/Wstrict-aliasing-converted-assigned.c: Fix syntax
errors in dg-message directives, add comments.
Index
notes (as opposed to errors and warning)
in compiler output are intentionally ignored, so this wasn't noticed
before..
This patch adds the required comments, and the tests now pass on
i686-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk?
Janis
2012-06-28 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg
of them. At least with this patch
we'll correctly check for one for each line.
Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu; OK for trunk?
Janis
2012-06-28 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nullptr19.c: Remove exta directives on same line.
Index: g++.dg/cpp0x/nullptr19.C
On 06/28/2012 08:02 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jun 28, 2012, at 10:26 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
No, there is no way to combine target and xfail,
Ah... Grrr I hate non-composability. Given that, I think the original
patch is fine, subject of course to the wants and wishes of vect people
Mike Stump says he got word that I am reinstated as a testsuite
maintainer so I added myself to the MAINTAINERS file (with, I now
see, a typo in the ChangeLog).
2012-07-02 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* MAINTAINERS (Various Mainterers): Add myself as testsuite
Between June 12 and June 28 I checked in lots of GCC testsuite patches
to individual tests and to test infrastrure files to eliminate
non-unique lines in test summaries, as well as a few related cleanups.
May I backport those to GCC 4.7?
Janis
On 07/06/2012 11:27 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Between June 12 and June 28 I checked in lots of GCC testsuite patches
to individual tests and to test infrastrure files to eliminate
non-unique lines in test summaries, as well as a few related cleanups.
May I backport those to GCC 4.7?
It's been
for the warning, this patch ignores the warning when it appears.
Tested on arm-none-linux-gnueabi. OK for trunk and 4.6?
2011-05-24 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/abi/packed1.C: Ignore warning.
Index: g++.dg/abi/packed1.C
On ARM, two g++ tests trigger a warning about changed mangling. The
warning is not relevant to the purpose of the test, so this patch
causes it to be ignored.
Tested on arm-none-linux-gnueabi. OK for trunk and 4.6?
2011-05-24 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/template
?
2011-05-24 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr43411.C: Limit xfail to ia64.
Index: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr43411.C
===
--- g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr43411.C (revision 174094)
+++ g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr43411.C (working
All archived test results for ARM for 4.7.0 and 4.6.1 with g++
results include:
XPASS: g++.dg/other/packed1.C execution test
This patch removes arm-*-* from the xfail list for this test. OK for
trunk and 4.6?
2011-05-24 Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com
* g++.dg/other/packed1.C
On 05/24/2011 12:40 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Janis Johnson wrote:
On ARM, two g++ tests trigger a warning about changed mangling. The
warning is not relevant to the purpose of the test, so this patch
causes it to be ignored.
Various existing tests use -Wno-abi
On 05/24/2011 01:36 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
On 05/24/2011 12:40 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Janis Johnson wrote:
On ARM, two g++ tests trigger a warning about changed mangling. The
warning is not relevant to the purpose of the test, so this patch
causes it to be ignored
On 05/24/2011 01:40 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On May 24, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Test g++.dg/abi/packed1.C triggers a warning for several targets.
OK for trunk and 4.6?
Ok. If there is a portable -Wno-inefficient flag, that'd be a slightly
better way to do this.
-Wno
On 05/24/2011 03:33 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Janis Johnson wrote:
On 05/24/2011 12:40 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2011, Janis Johnson wrote:
On ARM, two g++ tests trigger a warning about changed mangling. The
warning is not relevant to the purpose
On 05/24/2011 05:49 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On May 24, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Is this one OK for trunk and 4.6? The failure occurs for arm-none-eabi
and for arm-none-linux-gnueabi.
You should repeat all the original options from the main dg-options line,
with -Wno-abi added
Changes went into ARM support recently to add an informative note after an
error about an invalid argument to -march=. This patch looks for that message
on ARM targets and allows the test to once again pass.
OK for trunk?
Index: gcc.dg/march.c
1 - 100 of 189 matches
Mail list logo
