Hi, on 2024/4/28 16:20, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Apr 23, 2024, "Kewen.Lin" <li...@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > >> This patch seemed to miss to CC gcc-patches list. :) > > Oops, sorry, thanks for catching that. > > Here it is. FTR, you've already responded suggesting an apparent > preference for addressing PR105359, but since I meant to contribute it, > I'm reposting is to gcc-patches, now with a reference to the PR.
OK, from this perspective IMHO it seems more clear to adopt xfail with effective target long_double_64bit? BR, Kewen > > > ppc: testsuite: pr79004 needs -mlong-double-128 > > Some of the asm opcodes expected by pr79004 depend on > -mlong-double-128 to be output. E.g., without this flag, the > conditions of patterns @extenddf<mode>2 and extendsf<mode>2 do not > hold, and so GCC resorts to libcalls instead of even trying > rs6000_expand_float128_convert. > > Perhaps the conditions are too strict, and they could enable the use > of conversion insns involving __ieee128/_Float128 even with 64-bit > long doubles. Alas, for now, we need this flag for the test to pass > on target variants that use 64-bit long doubles. > > > for gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog > > * gcc.target/powerpr/pr79004.c: Add -mlong-double-128. > --- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c > index e411702dc98a9..061a0e83fe2ad 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr79004.c > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > /* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-* && lp64 } } } */ > /* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_p9vector_ok } */ > -/* { dg-options "-mdejagnu-cpu=power9 -O2 -mfloat128" } */ > +/* { dg-options "-mdejagnu-cpu=power9 -O2 -mfloat128 -mlong-double-128" } */ > /* { dg-prune-output ".-mfloat128. option may not be fully supported" } */ > > #include <math.h> > >