On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 14:17, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
<richard.earns...@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 19/12/2024 12:17, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > Without this patch, testcases using arm_v8_3a_fp16_complex_neon fail
> > to compile on arm-linux-gnueabihf with
> > fatal error: gnu/stubs-soft.h: No such file or directory
> > because they are actually compiled with
> > -mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=auto -mcpu=unset -march=armv8.3-a+fp16
> >
> > Fix this by including stdint.h in the sample code for the effective-target.
> >
> > This makes these tests PASS instead of being UNRESOLVED:
> > fast-math-bb-slp-complex-add-half-float.c
> > fast-math-bb-slp-complex-mla-half-float.c
> > fast-math-bb-slp-complex-mls-half-float.c
> > fast-math-bb-slp-complex-mul-half-float.c
> > fast-math-complex-add-half-float.c
> > fast-math-complex-mla-half-float.c
> > fast-math-complex-mls-half-float.c
> > fast-math-complex-mul-half-float.c
> >
> > except for two new
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/complex/fast-math-complex-mls-half-float.c scan-tree-dump
> > vect "Found COMPLEX_ADD_ROT270"
> > (and the same with -flto -ffat-lto-objects)
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * lib/target-supports.exp
> > (check_effective_target_arm_v8_3a_fp16_complex_neon_ok_nocache):
> > Include stdint.h.
> > ---
> > gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
> > b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
> > index a16e9534ccd..9f4e2700dd2 100644
> > --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp
> > @@ -13298,6 +13298,7 @@ proc
> > check_effective_target_arm_v8_3a_fp16_complex_neon_ok_nocache { } {
> > #if !defined (__ARM_FEATURE_COMPLEX)
> > #error "__ARM_FEATURE_COMPLEX not defined"
> > #endif
> > + #include <stdint.h>
> > } "$flags -mcpu=unset -march=armv8.3-a+fp16"] } {
> > set et_arm_v8_3a_fp16_complex_neon_flags \
> > "$flags -mcpu=unset -march=armv8.3-a+fp16"
>
> I'm somewhat surprised that a test in gcc.dg/vect/complex is using an
> unguarded arm_... set of options. Tamar, I think this test is one of yours:
> how is this supposed to work on non-arm platforms?
>
IIUC add_options_for_arm_v8_3a_fp16_complex_neon calls
check_effective_target_arm_v8_3a_fp16_complex_neon_ok which returns 0
on non-arm / non-aaarch64 platforms, thus keeps "$flags" unchanged.
I was a bit surprised too :-)
Many (not most) of the check_effective_target_arm* do NOT have the:
if { ![istarget arm*-*-*] && ![istarget aarch64*-*-*] } {
return 0;
}
Thanks,
Christophe
> R.
