> From: Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 10:06:49 +0100
> As Andrew said the fix the testcase was written for was targeting
> --param logical-op-non-short-circuit=1 it makes more sense to force
> that so we continue to check it works.
'k, that's a valid argument.
> We should simply track the failure to optimize with =0 in a new PR.
Ok: I cloned PR111456 as 117973; will sent a separate patch for that.
> So, OK with avoiding the XFAIL and defaulting to =1.
This is what I'll commit, with that preapproval:
Subject: [PATCH] testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c: Handle fallout
This is expected fallout from r15-5646-gd1cf0d7a0f27fd as
described by that commit. The =0 case is covered by
PR117973.
PR tree-optimization/117954
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c: Pass
--param=logical-op-non-short-circuit=1.
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c
b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c
index ffff664a1afa..2e89228761c7 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr111456-1.c
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-optimized" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-tree-optimized --param
logical-op-non-short-circuit=1" } */
/* PR tree-optimization/111456 */
void foo(void);
--
2.30.2
