On 02/11/15 09:28, Yvan Roux wrote:
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.
Ok, moving the test to the torture suite sounds best.
I'll prepare a patch.
Sorry for the trouble,
Kyrill
Yvan
regards
Ramana
Christophe.
Yvan
regards
Ramana
Cheers,
Yvan
