Toma Tabacu <toma.tab...@imgtec.com> writes:
> Hi,
> 
> The patch below is a rebased version of Andrew's patch plus a few more changes
> to test options.
> 
> I have tested Andrew's patch by passing -msoft-float to the testsuite without
> having a soft-float library available, and saw that the 
> inline-memcpy-{1,2,3,4,5}.c
> and memcpy-1.c tests were also failing to find standard library headers.
> In the version below, I have added (REQUIRES_STDLIB) to them as well.
> 
> However, I believe that the memcpy-1.c test was removed from the first version
> of Andrew's patch in response to Matthew's comments, but I don't think it
> should be.
> 
> Tested with mips-img-linux-gnu and mips-mti-linux-gnu.

This looks OK to me but I then again I helped with the design for this.

I'd like to give Catherine a chance to take a look though as the feature is 
unusual.

One comment below.

> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/mips/mips.exp
> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/mips/mips.exp
> index e22d782..ccd4ecb 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/mips/mips.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/mips/mips.exp
> @@ -1420,6 +1426,22 @@ proc mips-dg-options { args } {
>       }
>      }
> 
> +    # If the test is marked as requiring standard libraries check
> +    # that the sysroot has support for the current set of test options.
> +    if { [mips_have_test_option_p options "REQUIRES_STDLIB"] } {
> +     mips_push_test_options saved_options $extra_tool_flags
> +     set output [mips_preprocess "" {
> +           #include <stdlib.h>
> +     } 1]
> +     mips_pop_test_options saved_options
> +
> +     # If the preprocessing of the stdlib.h file produced errors mark
> +     # the test as unsupported.
> +     if { ![string equal $output ""] } {
> +         set do_what [lreplace $do_what 1 1 "N"]

We should describe what we expect the format of do_what to be at the time
of writing in case it ever changes. i.e. a comment to say what the second
character means and therefore make it clear that setting it to 'n' makes
the test unsupported.

Thanks,
Matthew

Reply via email to