fpetrogalli marked 2 inline comments as done. fpetrogalli added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/aarch64-sve2-intrinsics/acle_sve2_tbl2-bfloat.c:7 +// RUN: %clang_cc1 -D__ARM_FEATURE_SVE -D__ARM_FEATURE_SVE2 -D__ARM_FEATURE_BF16_SCALAR_ARITHMETIC -triple aarch64-none-linux-gnu -target-feature +sve2 -target-feature +bf16 -fallow-half-arguments-and-returns -fsyntax-only -verify -verify-ignore-unexpected=error -verify-ignore-unexpected=note %s +// R UN: %clang_cc1 -D__ARM_FEATURE_SVE -D__ARM_FEATURE_SVE2 -D__ARM_FEATURE_BF16_SCALAR_ARITHMETIC -DSVE_OVERLOADED_FORMS -triple aarch64-none-linux-gnu -target-feature +sve2 -target-feature +bf16 -fallow-half-arguments-and-returns -fsyntax-only -verify=overload-bf16 -verify-ignore-unexpected=error -verify-ignore-unexpected=note %s + ---------------- c-rhodes wrote: > c-rhodes wrote: > > fpetrogalli wrote: > > > I could do with an extra pair of eyes here: I can't figure out why the > > > warning raised by this run is not detected by the `overload-bf16-warning` > > > below... (Same for the same line I have added in the test for tbx). > > Ah, it works in the example I linked because `whilerw` / `whilewr` uses the > > scalar `bfloat16_t`, whereas this is using sizeless type which is > > predicated on `-D__ARM_FEATURE_SVE_BF16` so we get: > > > > ```error: 'error' diagnostics seen but not expected: > > File > > /home/culrho01/llvm-project/clang/test/CodeGen/aarch64-sve2-intrinsics/acle_sve2_tbl2-bfloat.c > > Line 18: unknown type name 'svbfloat16_t'; did you mean 'svfloat16_t'? > > File > > /home/culrho01/llvm-project/clang/test/CodeGen/aarch64-sve2-intrinsics/acle_sve2_tbl2-bfloat.c > > Line 18: unknown type name 'svbfloat16x2_t'; did you mean > > 'svfloat16x2_t'?``` > > > > I'm not sure if/how we can test this for the overloaded form > I'm not sure if what I suggested makes sense - trying to do what we've done > in the sve2 acle tests where we expect an implicit declaration warning for > overloaded/non-overloaded intrinsics if the sve2 feature isn't enabled. I > guess it's different for BF16 as the types are guarded on the feature macro > in the ACLE, for whatever reason we get the same warning for the > non-overloaded intrinsics but an error for the overloaded ones. I think we > can be pretty confident `+bf16` is required as the test will fail otherwise, > but it's tricky trying to isolate an error implying the macro is missing on > the intrinsic. FWIW we don't test this for SVE either, I think we can skip > this test for the overloaded form, may as well keep the non-overloaded one in > if it works. Agree. I have removed the overload tests for the warning. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D82429/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D82429 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
