Make the order in which we try -mfloat-abi options consistent with the
other similar effective targets: try softfp first, then hard.
We have new failures on arm-eabi:
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/bfloat16_scalar_1_1.c check-function-bodies stacktest1
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/bfloat16_simd_1_1.c check-function-bodies stacktest1
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/bfloat16_simd_1_1.c check-function-bodies stacktest2
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/bfloat16_simd_1_1.c check-function-bodies stacktest3
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/bf16_ma_1.c check-function-bodies test_vfmabq_f32
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/bf16_ma_1.c check-function-bodies test_vfmabq_lane_f32
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/bf16_ma_1.c check-function-bodies
test_vfmabq_laneq_f32
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/bf16_ma_1.c check-function-bodies test_vfmatq_f32
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/bf16_ma_1.c check-function-bodies test_vfmatq_lane_f32
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/bf16_ma_1.c check-function-bodies
test_vfmatq_laneq_f32
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/bf16_mmla_1.c check-function-bodies test_vmmlaq_f32
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-1.c check-function-bodies sfoo_lane
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-1.c check-function-bodies sfooq_lane
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-1.c check-function-bodies usfoo
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-1.c check-function-bodies usfoo_lane
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-1.c check-function-bodies usfoo_lane_untied
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-1.c check-function-bodies usfoo_untied
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-1.c check-function-bodies usfooq_lane
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-2.c check-function-bodies sfoo_lane
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-2.c check-function-bodies sfooq_lane
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-2.c check-function-bodies usfoo
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-2.c check-function-bodies usfoo_lane
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-2.c check-function-bodies usfoo_lane_untied
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-2.c check-function-bodies usfoo_untied
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-2-2.c check-function-bodies usfooq_lane
are these tests supposed to require -float-abi=hard?
2020-04-21 Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org>
gcc/testsuite/
* lib/target-supports.exp
(check_effective_target_arm_v8_2a_i8mm_ok_nocache): Fix
-mfloat-abi= options order.
(check_effective_target_arm_v8_2a_bf16_neon_ok_nocache): Likewise.
---
gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
index a667ddf..53ff2f6 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
@@ -5017,7 +5017,7 @@ proc check_effective_target_arm_v8_2a_i8mm_ok_nocache { }
{
# Iterate through sets of options to find the compiler flags that
# need to be added to the -march option.
- foreach flags {"" "-mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8"
"-mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8" } {
+ foreach flags {"" "-mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8"
"-mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8" } {
if { [check_no_compiler_messages_nocache \
arm_v8_2a_i8mm_ok object {
#include <arm_neon.h>
@@ -5102,7 +5102,7 @@ proc
check_effective_target_arm_v8_2a_bf16_neon_ok_nocache { } {
return 0;
}
- foreach flags {"" "-mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8"
"-mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8" } {
+ foreach flags {"" "-mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8"
"-mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8" } {
if { [check_no_compiler_messages_nocache arm_v8_2a_bf16_neon_ok object
{
#include <arm_neon.h>
#if !defined (__ARM_FEATURE_BF16_VECTOR_ARITHMETIC)
--
2.7.4
