Re: T11758 testcase help needed
Hi Alex, You're deleting hacks that were added for ancient version of binutils (added in 14a5aadb84c34dbe2bee129ed80fdfa1fb12e3e0 in 2005 and b8a64b8ec9cd3d8f6e3f23e44312c4903eccac45 in 2007). I think that if you submit your patch without a test, there's a good chance it will get accepted. Thomas On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Edward Z. Yang wrote: > I am not sure if this will work, but how about dumping the assembly and > looking for sign extension? C-- might be easier! > > Excerpts from Alex Dzyoba's message of 2016-07-09 08:25:39 -0400: > > Hi, all! > > > > I was working on #11758, which is about dropping binutils<2.17 hack, and > while > > it was relatively easy to remove the hack itself, I'm not sure how to > add a > > test case for it. > > > > As I understand, after removing the aforementioned hack, native codegen > now > > shouldn't generate sign extension. So my question is how to test it? > Should it > > be Cmm file that will be tested with `compile_cmp_asm` like memcpy in > > "codeGen/should_gen_asm/memcpy.cmm"? Or should I stick to > > the Haskell test? > > > > Thanks, > > Alex Dzyoba > ___ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > ___ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
Re: T11758 testcase help needed
I am not sure if this will work, but how about dumping the assembly and looking for sign extension? C-- might be easier! Excerpts from Alex Dzyoba's message of 2016-07-09 08:25:39 -0400: > Hi, all! > > I was working on #11758, which is about dropping binutils<2.17 hack, and while > it was relatively easy to remove the hack itself, I'm not sure how to add a > test case for it. > > As I understand, after removing the aforementioned hack, native codegen now > shouldn't generate sign extension. So my question is how to test it? Should it > be Cmm file that will be tested with `compile_cmp_asm` like memcpy in > "codeGen/should_gen_asm/memcpy.cmm"? Or should I stick to > the Haskell test? > > Thanks, > Alex Dzyoba ___ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
T11758 testcase help needed
Hi, all! I was working on #11758, which is about dropping binutils<2.17 hack, and while it was relatively easy to remove the hack itself, I'm not sure how to add a test case for it. As I understand, after removing the aforementioned hack, native codegen now shouldn't generate sign extension. So my question is how to test it? Should it be Cmm file that will be tested with `compile_cmp_asm` like memcpy in "codeGen/should_gen_asm/memcpy.cmm"? Or should I stick to the Haskell test? Thanks, Alex Dzyoba ___ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
