> David Edelsohn wrote: > >>>>>>Joel Sherrill writes: > >>>>>> > > > >Joel> Those all look like checks to see if the compiler itself > >Joel> supports Altivec -- not a run-time check on the hardware > >Joel> like the Neon check_effective_target_arm_neon_hw appears > >Joel> to be. > > > > Look at check_vmx_hw_available again. > > > Whoops. That one does indeed check it. And the RTEMS > target has an ugly exception. The next set of failures below > that point are not altivec related. I see a block of failures > like this: > > FAIL: gcc.misc-tests/bprob-1.c execution: file bprob-1.gcda does not > exist, -fprofile-arcs > > And this: > > FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/405-mullhw-1.c scan-assembler mullhw > > Are those things which would be expected to fail on a vanilla > 603e target without networking or disk?
branch probability test expect the testcase to output a profile during execution, so unless you have gcov runtime support I guess it is expected. I dunno about mullhw. Honza > > Is this another category of tests to avoid somehow? > > -joel > >David > > > > > > > -- > Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On-Line Applications Research > Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 > Support Available (256) 722-9985 >
