On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 11:48:36AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 7/20/24 01:58, Sam James wrote:
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/pr116003.c (test for excess errors)
> > Excess errors:
> > /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_5/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr116003.c:4:1:
> > sorry, unimplemented: '_BitInt(5)' is not supported on this target
> > /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_5/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr116003.c:8:1:
> > sorry, unimplemented: '_BitInt(129)' is not supported on this target
> > /home/tcwg-buildslave/workspace/tcwg_gnu_5/abe/snapshots/gcc.git~master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr116003.c:11:5:
> > sorry, unimplemented: '_BitInt(128)' is not supported on this target
> >
> > I think it needs dg-do compile { target bitint }.
> >
> Indeed, thanks. Pushed.
This isn't enough.
The bitint effective target just means that the target supports
at least some _BitInt precisions (the standard in that case mandates
support for at least bits in long long, so 64), but this testcase
uses _BitInt(129), for that one needs to check for
#if __BITINT_MAXWIDTH__ >= 129
or use e.g. bitint575 effective target which guarantees _BitInt(575)
support.
Jakub
