On 2025-02-28 16:06, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 08/11/2024 17:44, Torbjörn SVENSSON wrote:
Ok for trunk and releases/gcc-14?
--
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/arm/pr68674.c: Use effective-target arm_arch_v7a
and arm_libc_fp_abi.
Signed-off-by: Torbjörn SVENSSON <torbjorn.svens...@foss.st.com>
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68674.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68674.c b/gcc/testsuite/
gcc.target/arm/pr68674.c
index 0b3237458fe..3fd562d0518 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68674.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/arm/pr68674.c
@@ -1,9 +1,10 @@
/* PR target/68674 */
/* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_neon_ok } */
-/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_fp_ok } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_arch_v7a_ok } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target arm_libc_fp_abi_ok } */
/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
-/* { dg-add-options arm_fp } */
+/* { dg-add-options arm_arch_v7a } */
+/* { dg-add-options arm_libc_fp_abi } */
#pragma GCC target ("fpu=vfp")
I've spent some time thinking about this issue. If we change the test
in the way you suggest we lose some coverage of other variants where
this ought to work, but the alternative is to only run the test on
platforms where the base architecture is compatible with neon anyway, so
we lose coverage for other builds entirely.
So there's no easy answer here. However, the options you've picked
above pretty much match the original bug report. I think that's
sufficient.
OK, and apologies for taking so long pondering this issue.
R.
Pushed as r15-7815-g879fd9c8226 and r14.2.0-852-ga42ef0938f3.
Kind regards,
Torbjörn
