On 2 November 2015 at 10:24, Ramana Radhakrishnan
<ramana.radhakrish...@foss.arm.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 02/11/15 09:01, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> On 2 November 2015 at 09:51, Yvan Roux <yvan.r...@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On 2 November 2015 at 09:38, Ramana Radhakrishnan
>>> <ramana.radhakrish...@foss.arm.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2015-10-12 Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PR target/67929
>>>>>>> * gcc.target/arm/pr67929_1.c: New test.
>>>>>
>>>>> This test fails when tested on hard-float targets, adding the
>>>>> following line to avoid testing it in such cases will fix the issue,
>>>>> but I wonder if there is a better dejaGNU directives sequence to do
>>>>> that.
>>>>>
>>>>> /* { dg-skip-if "avoid conflicting multilib options" { *-*-*eabihf } {
>>>>> "*" } { "" } } */
>>>>
>>>> No, not without further investigation into why the test is failing.
>>>
>>> Sorry, it fails because of the ABI mismatch between the built libs for
>>> HF targets and the testcase which is built with the flag
>>> -mfloat-abi=softfp (which is added by the directive arm_vfpv3_ok)
>>>
>> I think that's what I meant in:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67929#c7
>
> Ah, I see what you mean - instead I would just remove all the special options
> and move this test into gcc.c-torture/execute.
>
> There are enough testers that test by default to armhf now for us to be
> worried about testing the exact combination.
Ha yes that's ture and I remember that we ended to that same
conclusion for one testcase I tried to find the exact float ABI flag
combination several months ago.
Yvan
> regards
> Ramana
>
>>
>> Christophe.
>>
>>> Yvan
>>>
>>>> regards
>>>> Ramana
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Yvan
>>>>>
