On 06/11/2024 07:44, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 at 07:20, Torbjörn SVENSSON > <torbjorn.svens...@foss.st.com> wrote: >> >> While the regression was reported on GCC15, I'm sure that same >> regression will be seen on GCC14 when it's tested in the >> arm-linux-gnueabihf configuration. >> >> Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-14? >> >> -- >> >> This fixes reported regression at >> https://linaro.atlassian.net/browse/GNU-1407. >> >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >> >> * gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c: Use effective-target arm_fp. >> >> Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svens...@foss.st.com> >> --- >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c | 4 +++- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c >> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c >> index 6e38671752f..1ed84f4ac75 100644 >> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68620.c >> @@ -1,8 +1,10 @@ >> /* { dg-do compile } */ >> /* { dg-skip-if "-mpure-code supports M-profile without Neon only" { *-*-* >> } { "-mpure-code" } } */ >> /* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v7a_ok } */ >> -/* { dg-options "-mfp16-format=ieee -mfpu=auto -mfloat-abi=softfp" } */ >> +/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_fp_ok } */ >> +/* { dg-options "-mfp16-format=ieee -mfpu=auto" } */ >> /* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v7a } */ >> +/* { dg-add-options arm_fp } */ >> > > So... this partially reverts your previous patch (bringing back > arm_fp). What is the problem now? >
Yeah, that sounds wrong. arm_fp_ok tries to find options to add to the basic testsuite options, but it can't be combined with arm_arch_v7a as that picks a totally different set of flags for the architecture. R. > Thanks, > > Christophe > >> #include "arm_neon.h" >> >> -- >> 2.25.1 >>
