Hi, > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 4:26 PM > > > > > > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp > > > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp > > > > @@ -1432,7 +1432,12 @@ proc check_effective_target_cilkplus { } { > > > > if { [istarget avr-*-*] } { > > > > return 0; > > > > } > > > > - return 1 > > > > + return [ check_no_compiler_messages_nocache > fcilkplus_available executable { > > > > + #ifdef __cplusplus > > > > + extern "C" > > > > + #endif > > > > + int dummy; > > > > + } "-fcilkplus" ] > > > > } > > That change has been obviously bad. If anything, you want to make it > compile time only, i.e. check_no_compiler_messages_nocache > fcilkplus_available assembly
Indeed, I failed to parse the space and didn't realize the kind of testing could be selected. > Just look at cilk-plus.exp: > It checks check_effective_target_cilkplus, and performs lots of tests if it > it returns true, and then checks check_libcilkrts_available and performs > further tests. > So, if any use of -fcilkplus fails on your target, then putting it > into check_effective_target_cilkplus is fine, you won't lose any Cilk+ > testing that way. Otherwise, if it is conditional say only some constructs, > say array notation is fine, but _Cilk_for is not, then even that is wrong. Ok. When I saw the very small list of target for which the condition returned true, I thought the goal was only to check if the target *could* support cilkplus and that actual support was tested by cilk-plus.exp. I'll revert this commit and prepare a patch to add arm in that list. > > In any case, IMHO the attr-simd-3.c test just should be moved into > c-c++-common/cilk-plus/SE/ directory. That was my thought initially but then I changed my mind, thinking that the test was placed there for a reason. I'll prepare a third patch to do that. My apologize for the breakage. Best regards, Thomas
