| Message ID | 4E64BBB2.20602@gjlay.de |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Hi, On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 02:08:18PM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > This test case contains expression 1 << 18 which leads to FAIL for targets with > sizeof(int) < 4. > > The mask seems not to be relevant for the test and can be set to, e.g. 14. > I have created the testcase by modifying the one for PR 43835 (testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr43835.c), the shift could probably be removed from the test altogether (but of course shift by 14 is also fine with me, though I cannot approve anything). I'm just wondering what kind of failure this causes (a compile time one?) and why that same failure does not take place with the aforementioned pr43835.c testcase... BTW, unfortunately I have recently also added a bunch of such shifts in testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr49886.c, are they OK? Thanks, Martin > Ok? > > testsuite/ > * gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (mark_cell): Use mask 1 << 14 instead of 1 << 18. > > > > Index: gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (revision 178527) > +++ gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (working copy) > @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ static void > mark_cell(int * interp, Pcc_cell *c) > { > if (c && c->type == 4 && c->p > - && !(c->p->flags & (1<<18))) > + && !(c->p->flags & (1<<14))) > never_ever(interp, c->p); > } >
Martin Jambor schrieb: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 02:08:18PM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >> This test case contains expression 1 << 18 which leads to FAIL for targets with >> sizeof(int) < 4. >> >> The mask seems not to be relevant for the test and can be set to, e.g. 14. >> > > I have created the testcase by modifying the one for PR 43835 > (testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr43835.c), the shift could probably > be removed from the test altogether (but of course shift by 14 is also > fine with me, though I cannot approve anything). I'm just wondering > what kind of failure this causes (a compile time one?) and why that It's a warning that leads to test fail: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c: In function 'mark_cell': gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c:37:7: warning: left shift count >= width of type [enabled by default] output is: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c: In function 'mark_cell': gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c:37:7: warning: left shift count >= width of type [enabled by default] FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (test for excess errors) Excess errors: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c:37:7: warning: left shift count >= width of type [enabled by default] > same failure does not take place with the aforementioned pr43835.c > testcase... I had a look at the test results and there is no warning for shift >= width of type for pr43835.c. Strange... > BTW, unfortunately I have recently also added a bunch of such shifts > in testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr49886.c, are they OK? As mentioned above, such shifts lead to respective warning and the unexpected output to test fail. So either the test case has to be flexible enough to treat also small targets with sizeof(int) = 16 or add some gate like /* { dg-require-effective-target int32plus } */ because if a test case actually uses a bit >= 16 on such a target it will very likely show malfunction anyway which is not intended for these kind of tests. > Thanks, > > Martin > > >> Ok? >> >> testsuite/ >> * gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (mark_cell): Use mask 1 << 14 instead of 1 << 18. >> >> >> >> Index: gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c >> =================================================================== >> --- gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (revision 178527) >> +++ gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (working copy) >> @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ static void >> mark_cell(int * interp, Pcc_cell *c) >> { >> if (c && c->type == 4 && c->p >> - && !(c->p->flags & (1<<18))) >> + && !(c->p->flags & (1<<14))) >> never_ever(interp, c->p); >> } >>
Committed as obvious. http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=178545 Martin Jambor schrieb: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 02:08:18PM +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >> This test case contains expression 1 << 18 which leads to FAIL for targets with >> sizeof(int) < 4. >> >> The mask seems not to be relevant for the test and can be set to, e.g. 14. >> > > I have created the testcase by modifying the one for PR 43835 > (testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr43835.c), the shift could probably > be removed from the test altogether (but of course shift by 14 is also > fine with me, though I cannot approve anything). I'm just wondering > what kind of failure this causes (a compile time one?) and why that > same failure does not take place with the aforementioned pr43835.c > testcase... > > BTW, unfortunately I have recently also added a bunch of such shifts > in testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr49886.c, are they OK? > > Thanks, > > Martin > > >> Ok? >> >> testsuite/ >> * gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (mark_cell): Use mask 1 << 14 instead of 1 << 18. >> >> >> >> Index: gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c >> =================================================================== >> --- gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (revision 178527) >> +++ gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (working copy) >> @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ static void >> mark_cell(int * interp, Pcc_cell *c) >> { >> if (c && c->type == 4 && c->p >> - && !(c->p->flags & (1<<18))) >> + && !(c->p->flags & (1<<14))) >> never_ever(interp, c->p); >> } >>
Index: gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c =================================================================== --- gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (revision 178527) +++ gcc.dg/ipa/ipcp-3.c (working copy) @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ static void mark_cell(int * interp, Pcc_cell *c) { if (c && c->type == 4 && c->p - && !(c->p->flags & (1<<18))) + && !(c->p->flags & (1<<14))) never_ever(interp, c->p); }