From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 758813858031; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 06:58:14 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 758813858031 From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug testsuite/97680] [11 Regression] new test case c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-10.c in r11-4578 has excess errors Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 06:58:14 +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: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 06:58:14 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97680 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0989e99470c2a6797bacf6d04888bc9a46a632a8 commit r11-7922-g0989e99470c2a6797bacf6d04888bc9a46a632a8 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date: Wed Mar 31 08:55:38 2021 +0200 testsuite: Disable zero-scratch-regs-{8, 9, 10, 11}.c on all but ... [PR97680] Seems the target hook is only defined on config/i386/i386.c:#undef TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS config/i386/i386.c:#define TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS ix86_zero_call_used_regs config/sparc/sparc.c:#undef TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS config/sparc/sparc.c:#define TARGET_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS sparc_zero_call_used_regs but apparently many of the tests actually succeed on various targets th= at don't define those hooks. E.g. I haven't seen them to fail on aarch64, on arm only the -10.c fails, on powerpc*/s390* all {8,9,10,11} fail (pl= us 5 is skipped on power*-aix*). On ia64 according to testresults {6,7,8,9,10,11} fail, some with ICEs. On mipsel according to testresults {9,10,11} fail, some with ICEs. On nvptx at least 1-9 succeed, 10-11 don't know, don't have assert.h around. I've kept {5,6,7} with aix,ia64,ia64 skipped because those seems like outliers, it works pretty much everywhere but on those. The rest have known good targets. 2021-03-31 Jakub Jelinek PR testsuite/97680 * c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-6.c: Skip on ia64. * c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-7.c: Likewise. * c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-8.c: Change from dg-skip-if of selected unsupported triplets to all targets but selected tripl= ets of supported targets. * c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-9.c: Likewise. * c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-10.c: Likewise. * c-c++-common/zero-scratch-regs-11.c: Likewise.=