Hi! On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 11:34:06AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > It was pointed out off-list that I should add some executable tests for > the new -msafe-indirect-jumps implementation. This patch adds three > such tests to demonstrate correct behavior. > > Tested on powerpc64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-linux-gnu. Are these tests > okay for trunk after the other patch is approved?
These look fine, so sure. One nit: > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-4.c (nonexistent) > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/safe-indirect-jump-4.c (working copy) > @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ > +/* { dg-do run { target { powerpc64le-*-* } } } */ > +/* { dg-additional-options "-msafe-indirect-jumps" } */ You could as well run all these tests on powerpc*-*-* as far as I see? Or does that -m error if there is no "safe" implementation for the current target? Segher