On 10/8/18 12:29 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 12:14 PM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: >> >> On 10/8/18 11:55 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: >>> On 08/10/18 10:47, Martin Liška wrote: >>>> On 10/8/18 10:46 AM, Renlin Li wrote: >>>>> Hi Martin, >>>>> >>>>> pr82625.C failed on compiler builds which don't support "default" and >>>>> "avx" target. >>>>> For example, arm/aarch64 native linux gcc compiler. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> As I found in this gcc wiki: >>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FunctionMultiVersioning >>>>> ''' >>>>> This support is available in GCC 4.8 and later. Support is only available >>>>> in C++ for i386 targets. >>>>> ''' >>>>> >>>>> Should the test be guarded with a target selector or require function >>>>> multi-versioning instead of ifunc? >>>> >>>> Hi. >>>> >>>> Sure, sorry for the breakage. I'm going to install following tested patch. >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Renlin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 10/04/2018 02:56 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>>>>> Hi. >>>>>> >>>>>> When having a pair of target clones where foo calls bar, if the target >>>>>> attribute are equal we can redirect the call and not use ifunc >>>>>> dispatcher. >>>>>> >>>>>> Patch survives regression tests on x86_64-linux-gnu. >>>>>> Ready for trunk? >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>>> >>>>>> gcc/ChangeLog: >>>>>> >>>>>> 2018-10-04 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz> >>>>>> >>>>>> PR ipa/82625 >>>>>> * multiple_target.c (redirect_to_specific_clone): New function. >>>>>> (ipa_target_clone): Use it. >>>>>> * tree-inline.c: Fix comment. >>>>>> >>>>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >>>>>> >>>>>> 2018-10-04 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz> >>>>>> >>>>>> PR ipa/82625 >>>>>> * g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C: New test. >>>>>> --- >>>>>> gcc/multiple_target.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> gcc/tree-inline.c | 2 +- >>>>>> 3 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 0001-Limit-a-MV-test-just-for-x86-target.patch >>>> >>>> >>>> From e3053abe58eba832262db0af77980012010a642c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>> From: marxin <mli...@suse.cz> >>>> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:07:29 +0200 >>>> Subject: [PATCH] Limit a MV test just for x86 target. >>>> >>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >>>> >>>> 2018-10-08 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz> >>>> >>>> * g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C: Add dg-compile filter. >>>> --- >>>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C | 1 + >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C >>>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C >>>> index 47bd2df1104..59b174f8c51 100644 >>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C >>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C >>>> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ >>>> /* { dg-do compile } */ >>>> /* { dg-require-ifunc "" } */ >>>> /* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */ >>>> +/* { dg-do compile { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } */ >>>> >>>> __attribute__ ((target ("default"))) >>>> static unsigned foo(const char *buf, unsigned size) { >>>> >>> >>> Which begs the question why is this not put under g++.target? >>> >>> R. >>> >> >> Agree, apparently we have quite some tests that should be moved: >> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr57362.C:/* { dg-require-ifunc "" } */ >> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr57548.C:/* { dg-require-ifunc "" } */ >> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr82625.C:/* { dg-require-ifunc "" } */ >> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr85329-2.C:/* { dg-require-ifunc "" } */ >> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/pr85329.C:/* { dg-require-ifunc "" } */ >> ... >> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/mv*.C > > You cannot move C++ tests to gcc.target/
I realized that we don't have ./gcc/testsuite/g++.target/i386 yet :/ Martin > >> I'll prepare patch for it. >> Martin >>
