http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-10-11 09:05:18 UTC ---
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-10
04:58:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Maybe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-11 09:57:19
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Have a look at vect.exp: there are specific naming conventions for
testcases that control how they are compiled.
Gah, you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-11 13:28:41
UTC ---
Author: glisse
Date: Thu Oct 11 13:28:27 2012
New Revision: 192359
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=192359
Log:
2012-10-11 Marc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 09:57:58
UTC ---
I expected these 2 lines to disqualify a basic x86 target:
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_double } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target vect_perm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-09 13:37:56
UTC ---
Maybe moving the test from tree-ssa/ to vect/ would be enough? Seems like
vect.exp uses check_vect_support_and_set_flags (I don't see how to use that for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54868
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-10-10 04:58:40
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Maybe moving the test from tree-ssa/ to vect/ would be enough?
I tried that and tested on x86_64, but the test wasn't run
