Message ID | CAKdteObmm01HG=_hZMu8eQ5xE8aU2mbN2qQ_V7E=zdb2Vhgm7A@mail.gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [ARM] backport r266665 to gcc8 | expand |
On 14/11/2019 08:40, Christophe Lyon wrote: > Hi, > > Is it OK to backport r266665 to gcc8 (Ensure dotproduct is only > enabled on armv8 neon) ? > I've noticed unnecessary failure of gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-compile.c > after I upgraded to recent binutils. > > Thanks, > > Christophe > Is there a PR for this? R.
On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 15:27, Richard Earnshaw (lists) <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com> wrote: > > On 14/11/2019 08:40, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is it OK to backport r266665 to gcc8 (Ensure dotproduct is only > > enabled on armv8 neon) ? > > I've noticed unnecessary failure of gcc.target/arm/simd/vdot-compile.c > > after I upgraded to recent binutils. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Christophe > > > > Is there a PR for this? > I don't think so, I couldn't find one. Maybe Sam remembers? > R.
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.h b/gcc/config/arm/arm.h index b12ae38..febd6b0 100644 --- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.h +++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.h @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ extern tree arm_fp16_type_node; #define TARGET_NEON_RDMA (TARGET_NEON && arm_arch8_1) /* Supports the Dot Product AdvSIMD extensions. */ -#define TARGET_DOTPROD (TARGET_NEON \ +#define TARGET_DOTPROD (TARGET_NEON && TARGET_VFP5 \ && bitmap_bit_p (arm_active_target.isa, \ isa_bit_dotprod) \ && arm_arch8_2) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp index e6b84041..857884d 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp @@ -4510,6 +4510,7 @@ proc check_effective_target_arm_v8_2a_dotprod_neon_ok_nocache { } { foreach flags {"" "-mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8" "-mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=neon-fp-armv8"} { if { [check_no_compiler_messages_nocache \ arm_v8_2a_dotprod_neon_ok object { + #include <stdint.h> #if !defined (__ARM_FEATURE_DOTPROD) #error "__ARM_FEATURE_DOTPROD not defined" #endif