From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id C1D0D3858C83; Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:49:11 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C1D0D3858C83
From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/105349] [12 regression]
 gcc.target/powerpc/bswap-brw.c fails after r12-8221
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:49:11 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: testsuite
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: segher at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-105349-4-5uHo1xUR1n@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105349-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105349-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:49:11 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105349

--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
And that is what the  {xfail {has_arch_pwr10 && {! has_arch_ppc64}}}
is for.  Does that not work for you?  Why doesn't it, it works fine here?

It would be nice if this unimportant edge case was costed better as well of
course, but it wasn't worth blocking this important regression fix on it.=