On 29 May 2015 at 15:35, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 May 2015 at 15:21, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bernhard,
>>
>> You asked to be CC'ed ;)
>> Applied this as obvious with r223864 to.
>
Hi,
Same problem with gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/simd/vextp64_1.c
fixed as obvious as r223876.
> oops, thanks for fixing! This obviously escaped my grep-foo.
>
> As said, i'd vote for -Wcomment -fno-ident to be added per default
> where testcases should opt-out if they want to test these explicitly.
> It's stressful to be on a tailcall-fixups branch thinking that you
> might have broken something when you see scan-assembler-not "call"
> fail due to the .ident :P
>
> Anyway. Thanks, again!
Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 223875)
+++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 223876)
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2015-05-29 Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org>
+
+ * gcc.target/arm/simd/vextp64_1.c: Close comment on final line.
+
2015-05-29 Dominik Vogt <v...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
PR target/66215
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/simd/vextp64_1.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/simd/vextp64_1.c (revision 223875)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/simd/vextp64_1.c (revision 223876)
@@ -21,4 +21,4 @@
return 0;
}
-/* Don't scan assembler for vext - it can be optimized into a move from r0.
+/* Don't scan assembler for vext - it can be optimized into a move from r0. */
