On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:37:03AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 02/13/14 03:54, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > >Richard Sandiford <rsand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > > >>Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@bitrange.com> writes: > > >>>On Tue, 4 Feb 2014, Rainer Orth wrote: > > >>>>AFAICT the gcc.dg/binop-xor1.c test is XPASSing everywhere since about > > >>>>20131114: > > >>> > > >>>Bah, missing analysis. "Everywhere" does not include cris-elf, > > >>>powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu, m68k-unknown-linux-gnu, > > >>>s390x-ibm-linux-gnu, powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.0.0. > > >> > > >>Based on this list I'm guessing it's another BRANCH_COST==1 > > > > > >BRANCH_COST==1 || !LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT > > ISTM that we ought to have a dejagnu test which we can use to ignore > > or otherwise change the expected output on these targets. > > > > We could try and be clever and determine it from compiler output, or > > somehow arrange for GCC to make that information available to > > dejagnu. But by far the easiest way is just a list of targets. > > Yeah, the BRANCH_COST and/or LOGICAL_OP_NON_SHORT_CIRCUIT value could e.g. > be emitted in some comment in selected tree dump if details are requested (say > -fdump-tree-gimple-details) and then an effective target can check for that > easily.
I've been thinking along those lines (though a RTL dump will be somewhat more appropriate). A target list will be insufficient when the branch cost etc. depends on compiler options. brgds, H-P
