Re: [PATCH, rs6000] testsuite fixup pr96139 tests

2020-09-11 Thread Segher Boessenkool
Hi! On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 02:55:03PM -0500, will schmidt wrote: > > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96139-c.c > > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr96139-c.c > > > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > > > /* { dg-do run } */ > > > -/* { dg-options "-O2 -Wall" } */ > > > +/* { dg-options "-O2

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] testsuite fixup pr96139 tests

2020-09-11 Thread will schmidt via Gcc-patches
On Fri, 2020-09-11 at 12:37 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 09:44:54AM -0500, will schmidt wrote: > > As reported, the recently added pr96139 tests will fail on older > > targets > > because the tests are missing the appropriate -mvsx or -maltivec

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] testsuite fixup pr96139 tests

2020-09-11 Thread Segher Boessenkool
Hi! On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 09:44:54AM -0500, will schmidt wrote: > As reported, the recently added pr96139 tests will fail on older targets > because the tests are missing the appropriate -mvsx or -maltivec > options. > This adds the options and clarifies the dg-require

[PATCH, rs6000] testsuite fixup pr96139 tests

2020-09-11 Thread will schmidt via Gcc-patches
Hi, As reported, the recently added pr96139 tests will fail on older targets because the tests are missing the appropriate -mvsx or -maltivec options. This adds the options and clarifies the dg-require statements. sniff-regtested OK when specifying older targets