On 10/10/18 6:35 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 10 2018, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> On 10/10/2018 13:17, Martin Jambor wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 26 2018, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 26 Sep 2018, Martin Jambor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I see, I guess the easiest is to skip the test on targets that do not
>>>>> really have long double, although if someone thinks that is too
>>>>> restrictive, I can also split the test again and move long double bits
>>>>> to a separate test.
>>>> You should be able to use
>>>>
>>>> { dg-warning "warning regex" "test name" { target { large_long_double } } }
>>>>
>>>> to make the expectation of a warning conditional without making the whole
>>>> test conditional.
>>> I hoped that Christophe would try this out because I do not have an easy
>>> access to a problematic architecture, but I can at least confirm that
>>> the following still passes on x86_64-linux (and should also pass on
>>> archs without long double, if I understood Joseph well).
>>
>> I did: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg01713.html
>> Sorry if I wasn't explicit enough
>
> Oh, sorry, I somehow completely missed that. Thanks for testing then.
>
>>> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ void tst_notcomplex (int *pi, long *pl, long double *pld)
>>> void tst_cplx_size (complex double *pcd, complex long double *pcld)
>>> {
>>> *pcd = cabsf (*pcd); /* { dg-warning "may cause truncation of value"
>>> } */
>>> - *pcld = cabs (*pcld); /* { dg-warning "may cause truncation of value" }
>>> */
>>> + *pcld = cabs (*pcld); /* { /* { dg-warning "may cause truncation of
>>> value" "cabs trunc" { target {
>>
>> OK for me, except that you have an extra '/*' in the line above.
>>
>
> Silly me, the fixed patch is below. OK for trunk?
>
> Martin
>
>
> 2018-10-10 Martin Jambor <mjam...@suse.cz>
>
> testsuite/
> * gcc.dg/warn-abs-1.c: Guard tests assuming size of long double is
> greater that the size of double by target large_long double.
OK
jeff
