[Bug target/91614] [12/13/14/15 regression][arm] gcc.target/arm/unaligned-memcpy-2.c FAIL since r274986

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91614

--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1d2257dc850d088f6d9267b4624ba08533ab2475

commit r15-8649-g1d2257dc850d088f6d9267b4624ba08533ab2475
Author: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
Date:   Fri Mar 21 15:20:03 2025 +0000

    arm: testsuite: make unaligned-memcpy-*.c executable tests [PR91614]

    These tests have been looking for a very specific instruction sequence
    which has the tendency to be fairly unstable as a result.  But what is
    more interesting is that the the tests must not contain instructions
    that can't be used for unaligned data, and whether or not the copy is
    executed correctly.

    So make these tests executable and scan the assembler only to confirm
    the absence of instructions that must not be used when the data is not
    aligned.

    These tests also used to be restricted to targets that support
    unaligned accesses (because you get very different code otherwise).
    But now we've made the tests executable and to check for the absence
    of problem instructions, just falling back to memcpy *is* an
    acceptable implementation.  So remove the requirement for unaligned
    accesses.

    gcc/testsuite:
            PR target/91614
            * gcc.target/arm/unaligned-memcpy-1.c: Make the test executable.
            Only scan for the absence of instructions that cannot access
            misaligned data.  Remove constraint of having unaligned accesses.
            * gcc.target/arm/unaligned-memcpy-2.c: Likewise.
            * gcc.target/arm/unaligned-memcpy-3.c: Likewise.
            * gcc.target/arm/unaligned-memcpy-4.c: Likewise.