From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30834 invoked by alias); 18 May 2002 01:01:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30805 invoked from network); 18 May 2002 01:01:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 May 2002 01:01:18 -0000 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (romulus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.251]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA26442; Fri, 17 May 2002 18:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id 7E4D610FC9; Fri, 17 May 2002 21:00:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15589.42934.379243.211740@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 18:01:00 -0000 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: ezannoni@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, msnyder@redhat.com Subject: Re: Problem with altivec.h? [was: Elena -- where is altivec.h?] In-Reply-To: <200205172258.g4HMwfJ19933@duracef.shout.net> References: <200205172258.g4HMwfJ19933@duracef.shout.net> X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00770.txt.bz2 Michael Elizabeth Chastain writes: > > In case this is not obvious, the altivec C testsfiles (or any altivec > > programs) need to include this gcc file because it has > > all the necessary #defines for vector types. > > include/gdb is for building gcc and gdb, not for building target > programs. Consider a cross-compiler + cross-debugger + simulator: > host=i686-pc-linux-gnu, target=rs6000-unknown-whatever. So that > directory is right out. > Yes, true. Long day, sorry. > gcc should be installing altivec.h with the other target include files. > AldyH would know about that. > Yes, that's what happens. > Perhaps you are testing out of a build directory, rather than an install > directory, and the dejagnu machinery is not producing enough -I flags? > (I am studying this area right now because I'm working on Petr's > f77/f95 patch). > No, I have found no problems with the tests. I was trying to address MichaelS concerns. > Suggestion: > > I did a find in the gcc source: > > % find * -name '*altivec*' -print > gcc/config/rs6000/altivec.h > gcc/config/rs6000/altivec-defs.h > gcc/config/rs6000/eabialtivec.h > gcc/config/rs6000/linuxaltivec.h > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/altivec-1.c > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/altivec-2.c > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/altivec-3.c > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/altivec-4.c > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/altivec-5.c > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/altivec-7.c > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/altivec-8.c > > Most of the altivec-*.c test files do not use altivec.h. They simply > use builtin keywords directly. Have a look at altivec-4.c. > You could write the tests like that. > Yes, actually I asked Aldy and that is what he suggested doing, just put the necessary #define (just one) in the .c files. I'll do that. Elena > Michael C