https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3367f78ff92971ac21c67c5d82df988863605f84
commit r13-8724-g3367f78ff92971ac21c67c5d82df988863605f84
Author: Roger Sayle <ro...@nextmovesoftware.com>
Date: Sun Aug 6 23:19:10 2023 +0100
[Committed] Avoid FAIL of gcc.target/i386/pr110792.c
My apologies (again), I managed to mess up the 64-bit version of the
test case for PR 110792. Unlike the 32-bit version, the 64-bit case
contains exactly the same load instructions, just in a different order
making the correct and incorrect behaviours impossible to distinguish
with a scan-assembler-not. Somewhere between checking that this test
failed in a clean tree without the patch, and getting the escaping
correct, I'd failed to notice that this also FAILs in the patched tree.
Doh! Instead of removing the test completely, I've left it as a
compilation test.
The original fix is tested by the 32-bit test case.
Committed to mainline as obvious. Sorry for the incovenience.
2023-08-06 Roger Sayle <ro...@nextmovesoftware.com>
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
PR target/110792
* gcc.target/i386/pr110792.c: Remove dg-final scan-assembler-not.
(cherry picked from commit 529909f9e92dd3b0ed0383f45a44d2b5f8a58958)
Diff:
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr110792.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr110792.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr110792.c
index b65125c48b62..eea4e1877dbb 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr110792.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr110792.c
@@ -15,4 +15,3 @@ unsigned __int128 whirl(unsigned char x0)
asm("":::"memory");
return tt;
}
-/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "movq\tWHIRL_S\\+8\\(%rdi\\), %rdi" } } */
