This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Patch Testsuite, obvious] Workaround fragility in gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-6.c

Just to ensure that this obvious commit gets noted... ( the other copy
of the patch is buried in this AArch64 specific thread: )

By the sort of exceptional bad luck that only comes around once
every thousand builtins, we now define enough builtins when
compiling for aarch64-none-linux-gnu that gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-6.c
happens to fail.

The test looks for "666" appearing anywhere in the dumps, but if you
happen to have 2665 other decls kicking around, you may well get
a decl_uid of 2666, as we will with aarch64-none-linux-gnu until we
inevitably add some more builtins.

  ;; Function f (f, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=2666, cgraph_uid=0, symbol_order=0)

  f (vec * r)
    vec b;
    vec a;

    <bb 2>:
    *r_5(D) = { -1, 0 };

This patch modifies the pattern the test is looking for to also use
the first element of the vector.

The test now passes on AArch64. I also hacked out the vector comparison
folding code and confirmed that this test started failing.

I've committed this under the obvious rule as revision 220440.


2014-02-05  James Greenhalgh  <>

	* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-6.c: Change expected pattern for
	tree dump scanning.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-6.c
index 0c08f8f..92424b8 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-6.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-6.c
@@ -10,5 +10,5 @@ void f (vec *r)
   *r = a < b;
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "666" "ccp1"} } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "2, 666" "ccp1" } } */
 /* { dg-final { cleanup-tree-dump "ccp1" } } */

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]