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 1329B385843D; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 01:30:56 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 1329B385843D
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1677202256;
	bh=b4tF/cfT+0G+l0U0FasB7g80dROIWawqMK+K1QYNq0I=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=tGz3RN6lHYH1l7MUuGJ5Tyh/qeVHooRNxGzIf1l1M9aYdD2xDNxqp9Gq/HzSGW1qj
	 mQ7Qjhm3GqPk8mWkyoh8Ri7iTAcaCZOGV9GUvJQU57M2nf8q6OMxTEiBj8NbH+rfq/
	 hi5otarneJDTdd47dNgpOEU3aQa/ZL1FZKUOvvPA=
From: "haochen.jiang at intel dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug testsuite/108898] [13 Regression] Test introduced by
 r13-6278-g3da77f217c8b2089ecba3eb201e727c3fcdcd19d failed on i386
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 01:30:55 +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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: testsuite-fail
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: haochen.jiang at intel dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-108898-4-w32LD5PFa3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-108898-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-108898-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108898

--- Comment #2 from Haochen Jiang <haochen.jiang at intel dot com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #1)
> I tested it on i686-pc-linux-gnu before I posted the patch, and it was
> working then. Can you be more specific what configuration you were testin=
g,
> please?

For fail
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18e.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "[\\n\\r]
[^\\n]* =3D foo\\.simdclone" 3
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18e.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "[\\n\\r]
[^\\n]* =3D foo\\.simdclone" 3
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18f.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "[\\n\\r]
[^\\n]* =3D foo\\.simdclone" 2
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18f.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "[\\n\\r]
[^\\n]* =3D foo\\.simdclone" 2
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18f.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "[\\n\\r]
[^\\n]* =3D foo\\.simdclone" 2

We can reproduce by:

$ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
RUNTESTFLAGS=3D"vect.exp=3Dgcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18f.c
--target_board=3D'unix{-m64\ -march=3Dcascadelake}'"
$ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
RUNTESTFLAGS=3D"vect.exp=3Dgcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18f.c
--target_board=3D'unix{-m32}'"
$ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
RUNTESTFLAGS=3D"vect.exp=3Dgcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18f.c
--target_board=3D'unix{-m32\ -march=3Dcascadelake}'"
$ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
RUNTESTFLAGS=3D"vect.exp=3Dgcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18e.c
--target_board=3D'unix{-m32}'"
$ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
RUNTESTFLAGS=3D"vect.exp=3Dgcc.dg/vect/vect-simd-clone-18e.c
--target_board=3D'unix{-m32\ -march=3Dcascadelake}'"=