[RFC] Mark gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c as XFAIL.

[Aldy Hernandez]

It occurs to me that I should not have disabled early jump threading in
this test, as it may hide an actual defect.  I have reverted my change
and XFAILed the test instead.  I have also opened a PR101690 to keep track
of this problem.

I have pushed this patch, but could benefit from someone with knowledge
of loop-ch and/or RTL shrink wrapping to look at the PR, as here we have
a valid jump thread that is causing loop_ch to drastically change the
probabilities ultimately having us fail at shrink wrapping.

Thanks.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

	* gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c: Enable early jump threading.  Mark as
	XFAIL.
---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c
index ba872fa23f6..6e1be8937fe 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/shrink-wrap-loop.c
@@ -1,6 +1,5 @@
 /* { dg-do compile { target { { { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } && lp64 } || { arm_thumb2 } } } } */
 /* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-rtl-pro_and_epilogue"  } */
-// { dg-additional-options "-fdisable-tree-ethread" }
 
 /*
 Our new threader is threading things a bit too early, and causing the
@@ -69,4 +68,4 @@ test (int *p1, int *p2)
 
   return 1;
 }
-/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump "Performing shrink-wrapping" "pro_and_epilogue"  } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump "Performing shrink-wrapping" "pro_and_epilogue" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
-- 
2.31.1