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 3BF5C3858416; Wed, 22 May 2024 12:14:35 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3BF5C3858416
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1716380075;
	bh=db7h8QBYQ2BstRgjmBov+q3OSlOaJ8Ty9j5P6lwzb0E=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=P9uLvEePaf9z9FMiH+6VXcT/Irbi1QzdhWuZLYCU2tqtu50iFAqSMkS8jUzkm55W5
	 V1V1Y3+3kFTveOiCPOHjO0ZR+5wtKXgqgG61k4j+nEw2Fr6ERib9Nf025Id0erIikB
	 rQAw1sm0cCM0E0/3RWJninXXbjJA9pOi3EOO3pgY=
From: "ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/114072] gcc.dg/vect/vect-pr111779.c FAILs
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 12:14:34 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: testsuite-fail
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
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: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-114072-4-VIFebx7MrS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114072-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114072-4@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=3D114072

--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot U=
ni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> -=
--
[...]
>> I think the best we can do then is
>>=20
>> /* { dg-skip-if "PR tree-optimization/114072" { be && { ! vect_shift_cha=
r } } }
>> */
>>=20
>> Lets the test become UNSUPPORTED on 32 and 64-bit SPARC, but still PASS
>> as before on 32 and 64-bit x86.
>
> Can we instead guard the scan-tree-dump?  This way the correctness
> execute part still is exercised?

Sure, even if the result is somewhat hard to read with all those levels
of braces:

/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "LOOP VECTORIZED" "vect" { target { vect_int=
 &&
{ le || { be && vect_shift_char } } } } } } */

This way, all of compile, execute, and scan are run on x86, while on
sparc it's only compile, execute.=