Hi Haochen, on 2022/9/1 13:30, HAO CHEN GUI wrote: > Hi, > This patch changes the sequence of test directives for 3 test cases. > Originally, these 3 cases got failed or unsupported on some platforms, as > their effective target checks depend on compiling options. >
Thanks for the updated patch! I just found that it seems all the three test cases suffer the empty TU error issue from those has_arch* effective target checks? If yes, it looks we don't need to bother this once patch [1] gets landed? Sorry, I didn't notice and ask when reviewing the previous version. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-July/598748.html BR, Kewen > Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-linux BE and LE with no regressions. > Is this okay for trunk? Any recommendations? Thanks a lot. > > Thanks > Gui Haochen > > ChangeLog > 2022-08-31 Haochen Gui <guih...@linux.ibm.com> > > rs6000: Change the sequence of test directives for some test cases. Put > dg-options before effective target checks as those has_arch_* adopt > current_compiler_flags in their checks and rely on compiling options to get an > accurate check. dg-options setting before dg-require-effective-target are > added into current_compiler_flags, but not added if they're after. So > adjusting the location of dg-options makes the check more robust. > > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c: Put dg-options before effective > target check. Replace lp64 check with has_arch_ppc64 and int128. > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c: Likewise. > * gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c: Put dg-options before effective > target check. > > > patch.diff > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c > index 72dd1d9a274..b4f5c7f4b82 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9+.c > @@ -1,6 +1,10 @@ > -/* { dg-do compile { target { lp64 && has_arch_pwr9 } } } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mdejagnu-cpu=power9 -mvsx" } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target has_arch_ppc64 } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target int128 } */ > /* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */ > -/* { dg-options "-O2 -mvsx" } */ > +/* The test case can be compiled on all platforms with compiling option > + -mdejagnu-cpu=power9. */ > > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mmtvsrdd\M} 1 } } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mxxlnor\M} 1 } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c > index bd7fa98af51..4e6a8c8cb8e 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr92398.p9-.c > @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@ > -/* { dg-do compile { target { lp64 && {! has_arch_pwr9} } } } */ > -/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */ > /* { dg-options "-O2 -mvsx" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile { target { ! has_arch_pwr9 } } } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target int128 } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target has_arch_ppc64 } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */ > > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mnot\M} 2 { xfail be } } } */ > /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {\mstd\M} 2 { xfail { { {! > has_arch_pwr9} && has_arch_pwr8 } && be } } } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c > index b396458ba12..6f4d899c114 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr93453-1.c > @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ > -/* { dg-do compile { target has_arch_ppc64 } } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > /* { dg-options "-mdejagnu-cpu=power6 -O2" } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target has_arch_ppc64 } */ > > unsigned long load_byte_reverse (unsigned long *in) > {
