On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 8:28 PM, Kito Cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Bin: > > It's 2 more line than gcc.c-torture/execute/scal-to-vec1.c since it's > need specific compilation > flag and specific target to reproduce this issue, > and it's can't reproduce by normal testing flow with > arm-*-linux-gnueabi (due to lack -fPIC flag), > so I prefer duplicate this case into gcc.target/arm/ :) > > /* { dg-do compile } */ > /* { dg-options "-O3 -fPIC -marm -mcpu=cortex-a8" } */ Not really, we generally want to avoid cpu related options in testcase since it introduces conflict option failures when testing against specific processor, e.g. testing against Cortex-M profile processors.
Thanks, bin > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Bin.Cheng <amker.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Kito Cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi Jeff: >>> >>> It's updated patch,bootstrapped and run regression tested on arm-eabi, >>> arm-none-linux-uclibcgnueabi, x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu and nds32le-elf >>> without introducing regression. >>> >>> Thanks for your review :) >>> >>> 2015-01-07 Kito Cheng <k...@0xlab.org> >>> >>> PR target/64348 >>> * lra-constraints.c (split_reg): Fix caller-save store/restore >>> instruction generation. >> >> Thanks for fixing the issue. >> The PR is against existing testcase failure >> gcc.c-torture/execute/scal-to-vec1.c. Unless we can create a new >> case, there is no need to include same case twice I think? Or we can >> mention the PR number in the original test case? >> >> Thanks, >> bin