On 06/07/11 18:33, Janis Johnson wrote: > On 06/29/2011 06:25 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> On 23/06/11 22:38, Janis Johnson wrote: >>> Tests wmul-[1234].c and mla-2.c in gcc.target/arm require support that >>> the arm backend identifies as TARGET_DSP_MULTIPLY. The tests all >>> specify a -march option with that support, but it is overridden by >>> multilib flags. >>> >>> This patch adds a new effective target, arm_dsp_multiply, and requires >>> it for those tests instead of having them specify a -march value. This >>> means that the tests will be skipped for older targets and test coverage >>> relies on testing for some newer multilibs. >>> >>> The same effective target is needed for tests smlaltb-1.c, smlaltt-1.c, >>> smlatb-1.c, and smlatt-1.c, but those also need to be renamed so the >>> scans don't pass just because the file name is in the assembly file. >>> >>> OK for trunk, and later for 4.6? >>> >>> (btw, I'm currently testing ARM compile-only tests with 43 sets of >>> multilib flags) >>> >> >> I've recently approved a patch from James Greenhalgh >> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg01852.html) that defines >> __ARM_DSP_MULTIPLY when these features are available. That should >> simplify your target-supports change and also serve as a check that we >> aren't erroneously defining that macro. >> >> R. > > This version uses the new macro from James Greenhalgh, making the > effective-target check trivial. The patch removes -march options from > the tests, and adds a tab to the scans in smla*.c so the scan won't > match the file name; there are other arm tests that use tab in the > search target. > > OK for trunk, and later for 4.6? Putting this patch on 4.6 requires the > new macro there as well. > >
I have no objections if the branch maintainers are happy with this. R.
