http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866
--- Comment #11 from Winfried Magerl <winfried.mag...@t-online.de> 2013-04-17 21:02:38 UTC --- Hi Mike, On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 08:15:47PM +0000, mikpe at it dot uu.se wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866 > > --- Comment #10 from Mikael Pettersson <mikpe at it dot uu.se> 2013-04-17 > 20:15:47 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #9) > > How to proceed? > > Derive a stand-alone test case from the failing glibc module and whatever > glibc > code it requires, then minimize it. If fixing broken gcc's XOP/FMA/FMA4-extensions on AMD-CPUs depends on my ability to extract a stand-alone-test from glibc-testsuite then I'm realy sorry for not having the necessary skills (as already stated). Why not simply using the failing test-cases from gcc-testsuite which are all standalone and depends on XOP: +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-1.c execution, -O3 -g +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-2.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-2.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-2.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581-2.c execution, -O3 -g +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O1 +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O2 +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O3 -g +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -Os +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -Og -g +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O2 -flto -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none +FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr53645.c execution, -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr51581-1.c execution test +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr51581-2.c execution test +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr51581-3.c execution test +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr51581-1.c -flto execution test +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr51581-2.c -flto execution test +FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr51581-3.c -flto execution test +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx-mul-1.c execution test +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx-pr51581-1.c execution test +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/avx-pr51581-2.c execution test +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse2-mul-1.c execution test +FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse4_1-mul-1.c execution test Or is this a formal problem because the subject does not realy match the whole problem which looks like a more general problem with extensions specific to bdver1/2/3 (and for this not reproducable on other cpu's). regards winfried
