This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Enable NewABI testing for all Linux targets
- From: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 19:48:19 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Enable NewABI testing for all Linux targets
- References: <alpine.DEB.email@example.com>
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> The MIPS/Linux configuration enables all ABI backends for all targets,
> including ones that used to support o32 only (e.g. plain mips-linux,
> mipsel-linux, etc.). I don't know when the change was made, but at that
> time the test suites were not adjusted to take that into account and these
> configurations fail to test support for the additional ABIs now included.
> Here's a change that updates the GAS and LD test suites accordingly; this
> builds upon the infrastructure brought with the SDE NewABI testing update.
> Several test cases had to be adjusted for targets that do not update the
> ISA selected when the ABI requested requires one higher than the toolchain
> has been configured to default for; my understanding is this is
> intentional. This has triggered regressions in testing immediately after
> enabling for mipsisa32-linux and mipsisa32el-linux targets, and the test
> case updates included cover them so that the final version below does not
> cause any new problems.
> OK to apply?
I'm ambivalent about this change. It seems to me that while
it's running more tests, it's actually giving less coverage.
It's forcing more and more of the GNU/Linux tests to act in the same way
as mips64-linux-gnu, so fewer of the mipsisa64-linux-gnu tests (say) are
actually testing the way that mipsisa64-linux-gnu itself will be used.
I.e. -n64, -n32 and -32 are commonplace options for all mips*-linux-gnu,
but -mabi=from-abi is either redundant (for the base configurations)
or incompatible with the target libraries, and so unlikely to be used.
That's just for the record though. The OK still stands.