On 6 June 2014 17:57, Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrish...@arm.com> wrote: > On 06/06/14 15:40, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> >> On 6 June 2014 01:32, Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote: >>> >>> Have these been tested for both big and little endian (especially for >>> tests where memory layout matters - load / store / lane number tests - >>> remembering that GNU C vector initializers always use array ordering, >>> which is not the same as the architecture-defined lane numbering for big >>> endian)? >>> >> >> I did run the tests on armeb-none-linux-gnueabihf (with qemu), and in >> addition to the FAILs I already mentionned I can see errors in the >> vzip and vuzp tests. >> At this stage I don't know if it's a bug in my tests or a compiler bug. > > > Didn't Alan recently fix a bug for big-endian in vzip / vuzp ? > > PR target/61062 > > Ramana > Maybe, but this hasn't been committed yet, so I didn't test with this fix.
Christophe.
