on 2022/9/3 01:36, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 08:50:52AM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote: >> on 2022/9/1 22:57, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >>> These two are independent, but apparently we have a bug here, which will >>> make what you did malfunction in some cases -- the test will not run for >>> ilp32 if you have RUNTESTFLAGS {-m32,-m64}. >> >> Yeah, because of the bug (or call it surprised behavior), > > No, I call it a bug. Because that is what it is! >
OK. :) >> the test case can >> fail for some dejaGnu version like 1.5.1 (how it places the dg-options >> matters). > > Yes, but that is only one way to expose the problem. > > The bug just should be fixed. Agreed. > >> But to be clarified, the order of >> >> /* { dg-options "-O2 -mpowerpc64" } */ >> >> and >> >> /* { dg-require-effective-target has_arch_ppc64 } */ >> >> matters in this proposed fix, not for the line with ilp32. > > Of course :-) > >> has_arch_ppc64 uses current_compiler_flags which only incorporates dg-options >> which is placed before the dg-require-effective-target. I guess it's related >> to how dejaGnu parses lines and sets global variables, for this kind of case, >> we have to put the expected order for now. > > Even just to avoid having to uselessly edit hundreds of testcases, it > would be better to just fix the bug! I think "the bug" here means the "-mpower64" with "-m32/-m64" thing, not the dejaGnu thing mentioned above, then yes. BR, Kewen