On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 13:07, Sam Tebbs <sam.te...@arm.com> wrote: > > Committed as obvious as r271954. > > On 05/06/2019 11:20, Sam Tebbs wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > When committing my b-key patch (r271735) I didn't svn add the new test > > files, this patch adds them and moves the exception tests to > > g++.target/aarch64. > > > > Tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and aarch64-none-elf. > > > > OK for trunk? > > > > gcc/testsuite > > 2019-06-05 Sam Tebbs<sam.te...@arm.com> > > > > * gcc.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_b_1.c: New file. > > * gcc.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_b_2.c: New file. > > * gcc.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_b_3.c: New file. > > * gcc.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_builtin.c: New file. > > * g++.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_ab_exception.C: New file. > > * g++.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_b_exception.C: New file. > >
Hi, I've noticed that: return_address_sign_ab_exception.C fails for me (and others according to gcc-testresults): return_address_sign_ab_exception.s: Assembler messages: return_address_sign_ab_exception.s:34: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_b_key_frame' compiler exited with status 1 FAIL: g++.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_ab_exception.C (test for excess errors) Similarly: return_address_sign_b_exception.s: Assembler messages: return_address_sign_b_exception.s:10: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_b_key_frame' return_address_sign_b_exception.s:35: Error: unknown pseudo-op: `.cfi_b_key_frame' compiler exited with status 1 FAIL: g++.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_b_exception.C (test for excess errors) and in ILP32 mode: cc1: sorry, unimplemented: return address signing is only supported for '-mabi=lp64' compiler exited with status 1 FAIL: gcc.target/aarch64/return_address_sign_builtin.c (test for excess errors) Excess errors: cc1: sorry, unimplemented: return address signing is only supported for '-mabi=lp64' These tests require some effective-target checks. Christophe
