On 12/4/19 2:50 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> It would be nice to keep *some* dfp test(s) to make sure we don't ICE.
> If we disabled all such tests already, like with this patch, we wouldn't
> have ICEd or seen this problem. That can be a separate test of course
> (and could be outside gcc.target/powerpc/dfp/).
Sure, I can add a test in gcc.target/powerpc/ that uses both a builtin
and an overloaded builtin to make sure we don't ICE when DFP is disabled.
> OTOH, if you add this check, we can lose the
>
> /* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_p9vector_ok } */
> /* { dg-skip-if "" { powerpc*-*-aix* } } */
>
> from all the dtstsfi-* tests, etc. (Well, no, need to keep the p9 part).
Agreed on not needing the dg-skip-if tests. Not only on the powerpc/dfp/
tests, but we should be able to remove them from the DFP tests that are
in gcc.target/powerpc/ too.
> Making such changes to the testsuite needs testing on *all* subtargets :-(
Right. I'll come up with a patch and hopefully Iain and David can test
on Darwin and AIX and I can test on Linux with --enable-decimal-float
and --disable-decimal-float. That should cover the major subtargets and
if it works there, I'd expect it to work on the minor subtargets too.
>> Why isn't just testing check_effective_target_dfp enough to disable the
>> tests on Darwin, --disable-decimal-float, etc.? That would seem to imply
>> that one of those targets we're testing against enables DFP, but somehow
>> we don't want to run the tests or they all still FAIL for some reason???
>
> It should be enough. Currently we just directly skip all tests on OSes
> that do not support DFP, but that is not as nice as the effective target.
Right, if using the effective target test, any target that adds DFP support
in the future will automatically get these tests runs for it, which is what
we want.
Peter
